[EL] Use of tax dollars to find one side of a referendum campaign

[Steven John Mulroy (smulroy)]

Thanks

Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse typos.

On Oct 24, 2018, at 6:42 PM, Fredric Woocher <fwoocher at strumwooch.com<mailto:fwoocher at strumwooch.com>> wrote:

Steven,

In California, it is unlawful for a governmental entity to spend funds advocating for one side or the other of a ballot measure.  The government can provide impartial information, but not engage in advocacy.  Of course, many issues have arisen over the years in attempting to draw the line between those two points on the continuum, and it is a repeated issue for litigation.

The leading case supporting the prohibition is Stanson v. Mott (1976) 17 Cal.3d 206 from the California Supreme Court, which makes public officials personally liable for unlawful expenditures.  There are a variety of statutes that have now also incorporated the prohibition into a number of different contexts (e.g., school bond elections, etc.).  The decision in Stanson relied upon Justice Brennan’s opinion in Citizens to Protect Pub. Funds v. Board of Education (1953) 13 N.J. 172, 98 A.2d 673, from when he was on the New Jersey Supreme Court.

Fredric D. Woocher
Strumwasser & Woocher LLP
10940 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2000
Los Angeles, CA 90024
fwoocher at strumwooch.com<mailto:fwoocher at strumwooch.com>
(310) 576-1233
From: Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Steven John Mulroy (smulroy)
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 8:38 PM
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
Subject: [EL] Use of tax dollars to find one side of a referendum campaign

 Does anyone know of authority regarding whether  a  governmental entity can appropriate funds to do one-sided public advocacy to support one side of a referendum measure?

A city Council voted to place referenda  on the ballot. All three are highly controversial. On the last city Council meeting before the election, the Council did an "add-on" item to the agenda, without public notice, and then approved it in the "same night minutes" departure from the normal two week approval process. The funds will be used to advocate for one side of the referendum.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181025/215cbc70/attachment.html>