Urge Snyder to Vote for Bill Restricting Ballot Advocacy by Local Officials

[XLFD]

You may have read about a bill awaiting the governor's signature that would seemingly violate the first amendment rights of public officials, prevent facts from reaching voters, etc.  Local officials and their media friends are not big fans of this sort of election reform, but what exactly does this bill awaiting lawhood actually say and do?

The majority of the bill is mostly meaningless election reform, only until you get near the end does the major change occur, effectively saying 'A person 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' to advocate for an upcoming property tax millage election within 60 days of the vote.

Proposed Senate Bill 571

The bill will make it virtually impossible for local governments to use public resources to comment on ballot proposals involving the government unit within two months.  The CEO of the Michigan Municipal League (MML) in an op-ed for the Lansing State Journal, views it as a bad thing.  He offered a letter from the mayor of Milan, Michigan that said it would hamper their ability to educate the public about local millages, citing the recent demise of a local media source and many people's inability to get information from oft-unreliable internet sources. 

He finishes with "if you value objective information about local ballot matters coming from the officials closest to you" to contact the governor and urge him to veto the bill.  Such analysis seems rather odd, for if you do have local elective officials that you trust (and don't we all...) do you really expect them to be objective on giving them more of your money to control by raising your taxes? 

And does it give you confidence in their ability to spend that money if they are spending thousands of dollars of tax money printing out fliers and brochures and buying yard signs, radio spots, and television ads telling you why they need that money more than you?   

The Detroit News also has come out against the bill.  It contends:  "Many people across Michigan are baffled by the Michigan Legislature’s desire to prevent school districts and other public bodies from distributing factual and unbiased information about ballot proposals within 60 days of the election... Already on the books are strong laws prohibiting local governments and schools from spending public funds for propaganda. Senate Bill 571 makes it illegal to share factual information."

Pure propaganda.  A public official can still share factual information until the cows come home, they just can't use public resources to do so, or do it while they are on the clock for the beneficiary public body. 

Someone who begs for your money, is not an objective source for how you should be spending your money!  Nor are they likely to give you factual information-- is that panhandler really going to use your money for bread or a bus ticket or is he going to purchase some beer or smokes with it?  Governments are no different, you just never know.

A couple of recent local proposals should indicate why it may be a good idea to adopt this as law.  Recall the Oakview Millage of 2012 and the massive amount of signage and brochures distributed throughout the community.  This required a significant amount of funds, provided from the ledgers of those who would benefit. 

Then there was the Mason Oceana 9-1-1 Millage of 2014 which featured the above details from their minutes shortly before the vote, and a lot of shameless propaganda from the local media provided by the millage seekers:  Future looks bleak if 911 millage fails and  Vote yes on 911 request.  This type of unpaid propaganda or 'facts' would still exist under this bill, as long as public resources were not utilized in financing the release. 

Other notable examples across the state:

• Muskegon County sent a flier to voters for a $6.7 million property tax hike in February 2015 which stated, “Repairing our roads is costly, but if everybody pitches in to help with this 1.5 mill proposal, it’s not much at all.”
• Traverse City schools mailed a flier to residents that said, "Traverse City Area Public Schools is asking voters to support the continuation of TCAPS' long-term capital infrastructure improvement plan by authoring a bond proposal on November 6, 2012."
• In November 2014, Pinckney Community Schools used school mailing lists to say the district was “asking voters to renew” a multimillion-dollar millage.
• Saline High School posted a video on its website in 2011 that featured a school official saying, “I’d like to ask for your support for our upcoming bond extension.”
• Lansing School District sent out a flier shortly before a bond vote that read, “Preserve Our Heritage. Fund Our Future.”

The amount of money many of these initiatives put behind their efforts of 'fact providing' makes it difficult to make a concerted effort to get out the factual arguments against them.  So make your voice heard and don't believe the people from the media and local governments at face value when they ask you to petition the governor to not sign this bill.  They are looking more after their interests than yours, as they almost always do when they make a ballot initiative.

[Willy]

I agree with you. It's about time these politicians and their underlings stopped using our money to promote their pet projects. It's up to all citizens to seek out any and all information regarding ballot proposals. We don't need to be spoon fed propaganda and B.S. as though we are ignorant and stupid. We all know that many Government agencies, if not all, are looking to keep their piece of the pie and many are willing to connive, wheel and deal, lie and deceive so they can continue to occupy their corner of the trough while saving their own jobs in the process. Thanks for posting this X.

[XLFD]

Your welcome, Willy.  When you see a lot of media outlets and local officials (not to mention the Michigan Municipal League-- but not the general public) berating a new piece of proposed legislation, it typically means that there is a lot of merit in the bill.  The shrill commentary on it somehow hampering officials' free speech rights and limiting the dissemination of 'facts' really just doesn't make sense when you look at the extent of the bill.

[XLFD]

Gov. Snyder signed the bill into law yesterday encouraging lawmakers to quickly pass legislation clarifying that the law does not affect the expression of public officials’ personal views or the use of public buildings for debates or town halls.

Let's all be public watchdogs and report on any local abuses of this new law in the election cycle of 2016.  For all of those concerned about the change in the charter to make the city clerk and treasurer of Ludington into appointed positions (rather than elected) this legislation will be helpful in quashing that. 

[XLFD]

Hadn't expected it from the proud and independent folks of Custer, but their local school board sent a resolution to the state protesting the new law that would disallow schools the ability to use the public resources of their school district to get more public resources for their school district.  Ludington and Scottville's boards have been officially silent over the changes, but don't think they aren't figuring out the best way to go around it themselves.  The COLDNews: 

The Mason County Eastern Board of Education approved a resolution Monday asking Michigan’s Legislature and governor to reconsider a law that prohibits local governments from providing the public with information about ballot issues for 60 days prior to an election.

“We’re asking our representative, senator and the governor to take a serious look at that bill they passed in the 11th hour and to reconsider that bill,” MCE Superintendent Paul Shoup said about the board’s action. “It prohibits communicating information about a ballot issue besides the ballot language itself. It puts a gag order on boards to not transmit factual information 60 days before an election. As people get closer to elections they spend more time trying to get information about what’s on the ballot.”

...He said the law — Public Act 269, which was formerly Senate Bill 571 — still allows political action committees to provide the public with information and opinions about ballot issues within the 60-day window.

http://www.shorelinemedia.net/ludington_daily_news/news/local/mce-w...

[Willy]

MCE Board of education seems to have missed the point of or can't seem to figure out why this particular Bill was passed. Public officials who self promote their own projects using tax payers money is something that is not in the public's best interest. They seem to think the citizens are to stupid to read the ballot proposals and understand them without their help. When has any school district ever promoted not voting for tax millage hikes or special bonds to upgrade school buildings? It's always been the practice of school systems to put money raising proposals on the ballot and then promote, promote, promote for that proposal. Even after tax payers have turned down a proposal the school systems come right back with another proposal to be voted on and passed. I've school districts repeat the process over and over until the public is tired of hearing about it and reluctantly finally pass it. MCE School Board is working against the interests of the taxpayers.