PDA

View Full Version : Guidelines for Local Government Agencies in Election Campaigns


Chief
08-27-2007, 01:30 PM
http://www.pdc.wa.gov/archive/pdf/04-02Revised092806.pdf

Public Disclosure Law Re: Use of Public Facilities in Campaigns

Revised September 28, 2006

RCW 42.17.130

Use of public office or agency facilities in campaigns — Prohibition — Exceptions.
No elective official nor any employee of his [or her] office nor any person appointed to or
employed by any public office or agency may use or authorize the use of any of the facilities
of a public office or agency, directly or indirectly, for the purpose of assisting a campaign for
election of any person to any office or for the promotion of or opposition to any ballot
proposition. Facilities of a public office or agency include, but are not limited to, use of
stationery, postage, machines, and equipment, use of employees of the office or agency
during working hours, vehicles, office space, publications of the office or agency, and
clientele lists of persons served by the office or agency. However, this does not apply to the
following activities:

(1) Action taken at an open public meeting by members of an elected legislative body or
by an elected board, council, or commission of a special purpose district including, but not
limited to, fire districts, public hospital districts, library districts, park districts, port districts,
public utility districts, school districts, sewer districts, and water districts, to express a
collective decision, or to actually vote upon a motion, proposal, resolution, order, or
ordinance, or to support or oppose a ballot proposition so long as (a) any required notice of
the meeting includes the title and number of the ballot proposition, and (b) members of the
legislative body, members of the board, council, or commission of the special purpose district,
or members of the public are afforded an approximately equal opportunity for the expression
of an opposing view;

(2) A statement by an elected official in support of or in opposition to any ballot proposition
at an open press conference or in response to a specific inquiry;

(3) Activities which are part of the normal and regular conduct of the office or agency.

Notes:

Finding -- Intent -- 2006 c 215: "(1) The legislature finds that the public benefits from an
open and inclusive discussion of proposed ballot measures by local elected leaders, and that
for twenty-five years these discussions have included the opportunity for elected boards,
councils, and commissions of special purpose districts to vote in open public meetings in
order to express their support of, or opposition to, ballot propositions affecting their
jurisdictions.

(2) The legislature intends to affirm and clarify the state's long-standing policy of
promoting informed public discussion and understanding of ballot propositions by allowing
elected boards, councils, and commissions of special purpose districts to adopt resolutions
supporting or opposing ballot propositions." [2006 c 215 § 1.]

WAC 390-05-271

General applications of RCW 42.17.130.

(1) RCW 42.17.130 does not restrict the right of any individual to express his or her own
personal views concerning, supporting, or opposing any candidate or ballot
proposition, if such expression does not involve a use of the facilities of a public office
or agency.

(2) RCW 42.17.130 does not prevent a public office or agency from (a) making facilities
available on a nondiscriminatory, equal access basis for political uses or (b) making an
objective and fair presentation of facts relevant to a ballot proposition, if such action is
part of the normal and regular conduct of the office or agency.
WAC 390-05-273

Definition of normal and regular conduct.

Normal and regular conduct of a public office or agency, as that term is used in the proviso to
RCW 42.17.130, means conduct which is

(1) lawful, i.e., specifically authorized, either
expressly or by necessary implication, in an appropriate enactment, and

(2) usual, i.e., not effected or authorized in or by some extraordinary means or manner.

No local office oragency may authorize a use of public facilities for the purpose of assisting a candidate's
campaign or promoting or opposing a ballot proposition, in the absence of a constitutional,
charter, or statutory provision separately authorizing such use.

Similar prohibitions on the use of public facilities by state employees and state officers are
described in a memorandum from the Attorney General’s Office regarding RCW 42.52 and
available at http://www.atg.wa.gov/pubs/publicfundsmemo062800.htm

BASIC PRINCIPLES

1. Public facilities may not be used to support or oppose a candidate or ballot
proposition. RCW 42.17.130. Facilities include local government agency equipment,
buildings, supplies, employee work time, and agency publications. The statute
includes an exception to the prohibition for "activities which are part of the normal and
regular conduct of the office or agency.”

2. The Public Disclosure Commission holds that it is not only the right, but the
responsibility of local government to inform the general public of the operational and
maintenance issues facing local agencies. This includes informing the community of
the needs of the agency that the community may not realize exist. Local governments
may expend funds for this purpose provided that the preparation and distribution of
information is not for the purpose of influencing the outcome of an election.

3. Public employees do not forfeit their rights to engage in political activity because of
their employment. Neither may agency employees be subjected to coercion,
pressure, or undue influence to participate in political activity or to take a particular
position. Public officials and employees should make it clear that any participation is
personal rather than officially sponsored.

This pretty effectively demonstrates why we heard so little from the Port officials during the runup to the Primary. While I understand the intent of the Law, it's effect in today's world is that it hogties the hands of the very people who are in the best position to respond to the propagandists like Larry Patella and his acolytes. Even with Patella out spewing outright mistruths, there was little that the Port could do about it, at least from Port facilities.

Waterbuffalo
09-08-2007, 11:27 AM
Near the bottom of your post is why the port or the employees could not speak of the ballot initiative.

Could the Port rent private banquet hall and invite people in an informal session to discuss what was going on? Including allowing Larry or some other pro-no person come in and give his/her side of the ballot?

Waterbuffalo
08-19-2008, 07:47 PM
<bumps..>

This would have been of interest to me, in my crushing and screaming wonderings as to why either political campaign did not want come down to Vancouver to use our facilities to debate..

I'm still fuming that we're not even given the grace or debate from this race. I think this might be one of the few things in the general race that might swing my vote in one direction in November.

Chief
08-20-2008, 07:04 AM
What do you expect? We couldn't even get 30% of the voters to respond to a mail-in ballot, so why waste the money holding a debate that few people will even attend. We don't even have local media that's good enough to cover such an event, and there is no reason why Portland's media should bother.

Do the math.

cewl

Waterbuffalo
08-20-2008, 11:25 AM
I see your math and point.. But it is a bitter pill to swallow..........