| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
It has always bothered me when candidates for office and those who are pushing for legislation use the public speaking time at City Council to promote themselves for office. Granted they have little money or other resources, but I don't believe this city owned venue is the proper forum for political candidates to get air time on Comcast public access when such programming is paid for by the city. Also, what about community meeting forums in publicly owned facilities when individuals preach party politics.
Section 169.257
MICHIGAN CAMPAIGN FINANCE ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 388 of 1976
169.257 Contributions, expenditures, or volunteer personal services; prohibitions; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.
Sec. 57.
(1) A public body or an individual acting for a public body shall not use or authorize the use of funds, personnel, office space, computer hardware or software, property, stationery, postage, vehicles, equipment, supplies, or other public resources to make a contribution or expenditure or provide volunteer personal services that are excluded from the definition of contribution under section 4(3)(a). This subsection does not apply to any of the following:
(a) The expression of views by an elected or appointed public official who has policy making responsibilities.
(b) The production or dissemination of factual information concerning issues relevant to the function of the public body.
(c) The production or dissemination of debates, interviews, commentary, or information by a broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical or publication in the regular course of broadcasting or publication.
(d) The use of a public facility owned or leased by, or on behalf of, a public body if any candidate or committee has an equal opportunity to use the public facility.
(e) The use of a public facility owned or leased by, or on behalf of, a public body if that facility is primarily used as a family dwelling and is not used to conduct a fund-raising event.
(f) An elected or appointed public official or an employee of a public body who, when not acting for a public body but is on his or her own personal time, is expressing his or her own personal views, is expending his or her own personal funds, or is providing his or her own personal volunteer services.
(2) A person who knowingly violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable, if the person is an individual, by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both, or if the person is not an individual, by 1 of the following, whichever is greater:
(a) A fine of not more than $20,000.00.
(b) A fine equal to the amount of the improper contribution or expenditure.
History: Add. 1995, Act 264, Eff. Mar. 28, 1996 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 590, Eff. Mar. 31, 1997 ;-- Am. 2001, Act 250, Eff. Mar. 22, 2002
Compiler's Notes: Section 2 of Act 264 of 1995 provides:“If any portion of this amendatory act or the application of this amendatory act to any person or circumstance is found to be invalid by a court, the invalidity does not affect the remaining portions or applications of this amendatory act that can be given effect without the invalid portion or application, if those remaining portions are not determined by the court to be inoperable. To this end, this amendatory act is declared to be severable.”
© 2009 Legislative Council, State of Michigan |
|
|
Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:54 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Although there is no municipal ordinance or known written policy regarding the use of city buildings for political purposes, most mini-stations and community centers adhere to the state law regarding such use. There was once an issue at Brennan where a volunteer brought recall petitions into the building.
The north end mini station is the exception and there have been numerous instances of violations here. During an election cycle one can find all kinds of campaign literature and candidates. |
|
|
|
Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:29 pm |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
untanglingwebs schreef:
[M]ost mini-stations and community centers adhere to the state law regarding such use. . . .
The north end mini station is the exception and there have been numerous instances of violations here. During an election cycle one can find all kinds of campaign literature and candidates.
"This subsection does not apply to . . . (d) The use of a public facility owned or leased by, or on behalf of, a public body if any candidate . . . has an equal opportunity to use the public facility." If all candidates are given the same opportunity, to leave informational literature, what would be the problem? |
|
|
|
Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:38 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
quote:
00SL2 schreef:
quote:
untanglingwebs schreef:
[M]ost mini-stations and community centers adhere to the state law regarding such use. . . .
The north end mini station is the exception and there have been numerous instances of violations here. During an election cycle one can find all kinds of campaign literature and candidates.
"This subsection does not apply to . . . (d) The use of a public facility owned or leased by, or on behalf of, a public body if any candidate . . . has an equal opportunity to use the public facility." If all candidates are given the same opportunity, to leave informational literature, what would be the problem?
No- the building is owned by the City of Flint who allows specified groups, such as block clubs, to utilize the facility for their meetings. This group does not lease the building. As such it becomes a limited public forum and is subject to the restrictions placed upon it by the city and the laws governing the use of taxpayer funded public buildings.
The North Side Restoration meeting is made up of various organization coming together to improve the north end. If the city allowed them to hold a candidate forum and they invited all candidates to the forum this would be legal. To the best of my knowledge, the city has not used public buildings for such forums.
While the city does not appear to have a written policy, they have steadfastly diallowed the use of any city building for political purposes. That is except the city council and that may just be ignorance on behalf of council as to applicable laws. The NorthEnd restoration meeting violates the city policy and state law by allowing endorsements to be made by members of the body including the leadership. This is primarily a democratic body and they are wooed by Democrats.
City Hall, Genesee County and other government owned buildings do not allow random pieces of campaign literature
Last edited by untanglingwebs on Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:16 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
|
|
Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:08 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
This raises the question of whether the Flint School Board violated the Campaign Finance Act when they sent school employees out to present the school millage to the public witha power point presentation.
This is from 1998, but I don't believe things have changed.
Current Problems in School BondingBy Michael Arens | May 1, 1998
Excerpt from Mackinaw center
School Electioneering
Units of government may not engage in electioneering—the spending of tax dollars or the use of public resources, either directly or indirectly, to influence elections.7 This is a legal and ethical fact that Michigan’s Attorney General has repeated on several occasions.8
In spite of this, some Michigan schools have reportedly used school telephones, computers, mailing lists, facilities, on-duty personnel, and even children in the classroom to "get out the yes vote" in bond or millage elections. Some schools even appear to have used or been solicited by private consultants for "election assistance" services to help in winning their bond elections.
Bond proposals should stand on their own merits without any direct or indirect government promotion. Responsible governments leave it to private groups, civic organizations, or ballot committees to run election campaigns. Certainly governments may provide objective, unbiased information regarding their bond proposals, but there should be a distinct line between voter education and covert electioneering and the astute administrator knows when it is crossed.
Public schools have a duty to uphold a posture of neutrality toward their elections, particularly since they themselves are in charge of running the elections. Purity of elections is a cornerstone of democracy, and when schools cut corners on this process, they risk undercutting the broad community support necessary for their success. |
|
|
|
Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:19 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Robert Campbell, the CFO and maintainence Supervisor of the Flint Schools went to at least 2 public meeting with computers and equipment to present powerpoint presentations on the millage. In my opinion this was a back door way of asking residents to support the millage.
From OAG opinion #6423 of 1987
Turning to questions 6c and 6d, while the Legislature has made wilful neglect of duty by a public officer or employee a misdemeanor, MCL 750.478; MSA 28.746, there is no statutory provision making malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance in public office a crime. Taxpayers may, however, bring a lawsuit to enjoin the unlawful expenditure of public funds for political purposes by a school district or a community college district. Mosier v Wayne County Board of Auditors, 295 Mich 27; 294 NW 85 (1940). In addition, a board of education or a community college board of trustees may commence an action against school district or community college officials to recover unlawfully expended public funds. Johnson v Gibson, 240 Mich 515, 522-524; 215 NW 333 (1927). Finally, if requested in writing by at least twenty-five percent of the registered electors of a school district, the attorney general may audit the records of the school district. If the audit reveals that school district funds have been illegally expended, either the attorney general or the prosecuting attorney may institute a civil action to recover such funds. See, MCL 14.141; MSA 3.241 and MCL 14.143; MSA 3.243.
Frank J. Kelley
Attorney General |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:50 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
MICHIGAN CAPITAL CONFIDENTAL
School District Resources Used for Candidate Campaign Announcement By Tom Gantert | Feb. 26, 2010
A Northville Public School official said the district will remove a link on its Internet home page that announced a school board member's run for the state's House of Representatives after being told by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy it may be in violation of the state campaign finance law.
The Northville Public Schools put a link on its home page that read: "Wadsworth Launches Campaign" under the "District News" heading. (Northville has pulled down the link, but you can view a screenshot here.) School Board Vice President Joan Wadsworth is running as a Democrat for the 20th district seat. The Wadsworth announcement linked from the district's site to a PDF file. The announcement of Wadsworth's campaign was written on Northville Public Schools letterhead.
When contacted, Wadsworth said that she had a different release she sent out and that the release on the Northville home page was published by the school district. She said it was done to inform the people in the district that she would stay on as vice president unless she won the election.
Mackinac Center for Public Policy Senior Legal Analyst Patrick Wright said what crossed the line was a quote from Wadsworth in the press release that talked about her ability to make "positive contributions" as a member of the House of Representatives.
"This is a campaign document," Wright said. "This expressed advocacy for this person running for this office. And it's blatantly illegal. Government's role is not to advocate for one party. ... This is about as egregious a violation (of Michigan campaign finance law) that you can find."
David Bolitho, assistant superintendent for Northville Public Schools, thanked the Mackinac Center for bringing the issue to the district's attention. He said the link would come down until the school could consult with its legal staff.
"The district and Ms. Wadsworth don't want to create any controversy for the district," Bolitho said.
The school could face a fine up to $20,000 and the person responsible for posting the item could face misdemeanor charges if the post was found to violate the campaign finance law.
-- |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 14, 2010 11:12 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Last Updated: June 28. 2010 1:00AM
Complaints over Berkley schools probed
Parents say district violated campaign finance law while promoting bond issue
Mike Martindale / The Detroit News
Berkley -- The Michigan Secretary of State's office is investigating three complaints against Berkley schools that allege the district broke state campaign finance law while promoting a failed February bond issue for building improvements.
The complaints allege the district and Superintendent Michael Simek used public funds, facilities and equipment to promote the failed $168 million bond issue.
At least 13 parents filed complaints with the state about the district and the Say Yes to Kids Committee that backed the bond. The state Legal and Regulatory Services Administration wrote Simek on June 18 informing him the complaints against the committee were dismissed. The complaints against the district are open.
Advertisement
Simek was unavailable for comment Friday. One of his assistants said the district had received the state's letter and had referred it to legal counsel.
About 4,600 students attend the Berkley School District. The bond issue was defeated 69 percent to 31 percent by voters like Gwynee Burke, whose complaint is one of three still under review.
"I became livid that at a time of mortgage foreclosures, record unemployment and sinking property values, that they would have the nerve to try and pass something like this," Burke said. "I can't believe -- seeing how it went out from every school -- that it was independently done. It had to come from the board office, and the superintendent, in my opinion, should be responsible."
Complaints by Kurt Hite and Joseph McGee also allege the school district provided a list of parents' names and addresses to the Say Yes To Kids Committee to solicit support for the bond proposal and used secretaries and other school personnel to send home a "backpack flier" with students expressing the need for a "new gymnasium, larger classrooms, newer classrooms and new technology."
Violating the state law against using school materials and personnel for such a measure is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 and up to one year in jail.
The letter informed Simek the allegations were not determined to be true or false but that he would have 15 days to respond.
mmartindale@detnews.com (248) 338-0319 |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 14, 2010 11:19 am |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
