There’s been some discussion and speculation about this on other threads. But here’s the details about the two political action committees have formed in support of different slates of candidates for Newton City Council.
Newton Democracy Political Action Committee was formed in March by Lisa Gordon who is a candidate for the Ward 6 city council seat. Lisa has since stepped down and Simon French is the chair.
In response, last week Voters for a Vibrant Newton PAC formed to support its own slate, with Allison Sharma as chair. Here’s the press release VVN issued today.
There are other groups out there that are promoting slates, but these are the only two organizations that I could find that have registered their political action committees with the state as required by law.
We’re talking city government, yes? Keep big money PACs out of these elections please!
Can each of the candidates comment on whether they support this new development in Newton’s electoral process?
Why is this a good thing for the city? Even if you agree with the philosophy of one or another PAC, why should we move to an era of big money in municipal races? This approach can effectively multiply the resources of candidates by tens of thousands of dollars.
Each candidate should rise or fall based on their ability to garner their own individual support.
I agree with @Lisa. Let’s hear from each candidate as to why they have agreed to be named by these groups and receive this kind of indirect financial boost.
@Greg, when will we know how much money has been raised by each PAC? Before or after election day? One of them, for example, lists $25 raised to date in the state report, which we know is much, much less than the thousands they have collected.
And where is the Globe enhanced local news team on this issue? (I don’t expect anything from the Tab.)
According to Massachusetts campaign finance laws, if a group spends more than a penny, they have to register as a PAC, and contribution limits are fairly tightly controlled, so the fact that they have registered as a PAC does not in my mind make them disreputable. One can look at their contributions and see if you think they are excessive.
The one exception to this is ballot committees which under current State law are able to raise unlimited amounts from any donor. We saw this in action with Respect the Vote which spent over $328,000 from two corporate donors to influence the last election.
If contained in amounts, I think these PACs serve a purpose. The vast majority of voters don’t have much insight into which local candidates support their views, so having suggestions from groups who have done their homework can be helpful.
This is a really interesting conclusion: “The vast majority of voters don’t have much insight into which local candidates support their views…” With all the forums and the like, I’m not sure it’s true. But, if it is true, that might be a more significant problem than the PACs.
And, @Sarah, “If contained in amounts…” means what level of funding, in your opinion? There is no limitation on amounts collected in total, and a group like this can bring in thousands in just a few weeks before an election, and spend it, before having to report publicly.
Paul,
I think you are confusing access to insight and insight. The League videos are incredibly helpful. But, go and check the view counts. The area council debates were a good opportunity to see candidate difference (even if one might quibble with the bias in the questions). But, there were under 100 people there, most of them minds-made-up partisans.
The videos, and my incredibly helpful takeaway posts, and the forums take a lot of time to consume. So, yes, it’s a problem.
@Paul, perhaps my friends are particularly uninformed, but most of them tell me they don’t follow local politics, don’t know who to vote for, and are always asking me for a list since I follow it more than they do. This is exacerbated by the fact that there are so many candidates for local office, and most people pay more attention to national politics.
Contributions to state PAC’s are limited to $500 per donor, and money raised this way I think is good for democracy and free speech. An exception to this is PACs can take unlimited amounts from candidates, which is more problematic. However, each candidate has pretty strict limits on how much they can accept from any one donor, so PACs can’t get unlimited funds from any one donor like ballot committees, even if they take the indirect route of getting money from candidates.
http://files.ocpf.us/pdf/guides/fs_contrib_limits.pdf
Obviously, this Should all be monitored by folks like all of us expressing our free speech rights, but I don’t think PAC’s should all be discredited out of hand. They serve a legitimate free speech purpose, but they should be “outed” if things look corrupt. I don’t see anything fishy with the filings Or actions from these two particular groups.
What Sarah said. In a municipality with 24 councilors, it’s hard for even the wonks to keep track of so many candidates. Slates are a reasonable way to convey to like minded people candidates that share your values (and face, it issues like development, inclusivity, sustainability, are values more than issues).
So we have two groups that have chosen a legal path to express their collective values. Totally legal and legit.
The litmus test should be in judging how they behave, not that they exist. Good PACs will have clear guidelines and limits on who and how much money they will take in and how they spend it. It’s also worth watching if either group spends money to go negative, as opposed to simply promoting the virtues of their favored candidates.
I am deeply disturbed by this worrying trend of bundled money being inserted into local politics.
I hope to set up a new PAC this week. BtheB (Ban the Benjamins) hopes to amass a massive campaign war-chest to donate to City Council candidates that pledge to help keep money out of local politics. ;-)
Update: Score one for transparency! Turns out Voters for a Vibrant Newton has posted its donation policy. I don’t see anything similar for Newton Democracy but please let me know if I’m missing it and then we’ll be able to score two for transparency.
Here’s Vibrant Newton’s policy:
Doesn’t look like there’s much opportunity for “dark money” for this group.
One other important distinction. Both are PACs for the purposes of raising money to support the candidates that share the PAC’s values. One, Vibrant Newton, the pro-housing PAC, is also aggregating community endorsers (yours truly among them). Vibrant Newton has over 100 names, which demonstrates a breadth of support for the PAC values.
The development-skeptical PAC, Newton Democracy, doesn’t appear to have collected anything but money.
@Sean: I wouldn’t totally dismiss Newton Democracy. I’ve seen their names of donors and it includes many thoughtful friends and neighbors that I respect. And they do seem to be following the law. I just hope they will make a more concerted effort at transparency in terms of their donation policies and supporters so as to not give all PACs a bad name.
Greg,
Both PACs are collecting donations. Because both are following applicable state rules, it’s easy to find out who are the good people donating to either.
In addition, the pro-housing PAC, Visibility Newton, is collecting the names of folks who share pro-housing values, even if they are not donating.
A couple of key points on PACs and how they relate to local elections:
— A group can not legally spend money to promote multiple candidates without registering as a PAC.
— A PAC can spend only contribute $500 in value per year per candidate it’s supporting.
The formation of a couple local PACs doesn’t mean we’re entering an era of ‘big money’ in municipal races. It means we have a couple of groups that want to promote a slate of candidates that share their values, and had to form PACs in order to do so legally.
@Greg
As Allison mentions, PACs are legally bound by OCPF rules when it comes to contributions. As the Treasurer for Newton Democracy it is my responsibility to ensure we follow the rules. I see no harm in following their lead and clarifying donation rules.
Whilst I applaud Vibrant Newton for not allowing Developers, Attorneys, and people having business before the council to donate I suspect donors to the Newton Democracy PAC will not fall into that category.
Its interesting that Vibrant Newton do not want people with business before the city to contribute, yet they allowed the chair of Newtons Zoning Board of Appeals to donate.
@Simon French: Thanks for the response. Appreciate both PACs’ desire for transparency. We’re all better off that way.
As for a ZBA member donating money; ZBA and other boards and commission members don’t typically, if ever, have business before the city and when they do we have ethics rules for those things, so I’m having trouble following your point.
Plus, I’m pretty sure that’s an unpaid job right, just as all the positions on our boards and commissions and area councils are unpaid? That probably equals 100 or more of Newton’s most active, dedicated, citizens. Where will Newton Democracy draw the line? Is your policy going to say that ZBA and area councilors can’t give to Newton Democracy? I certainly hope not!
@Greg,
I personally do not mind a ZBA member donating money. It just struck a chord that Vibrant Newtons policy does not allow people before the city to donate, yet people making decisions in an official capacity can.
Still not following Simon. You “personally do not mind” and you acknowledge that the person has no business before the city. So the point is?
@Greg,
I am simply mentioning that developers etc are not allowed to donate. Yet the officials who could be potentially voting for or against a developer can. It does not strike me as balanced. Its not a big deal. As you mention, we have ethics rules, and I am not trying to suggest anything unethical is going on.
I’m trying, Simon. Really. But I’m still not following. Lisa Gordon founded Newton Democracy and, if elected to the city council, she will be voting on what developers can or can’t do. How is that different?
Greg. Its not my policy. Its not OCPF’s. Its Vibrant Newtons Policy.
@Simon: Uncle!
Have a good day.
Let me try again to make my point a bit more clear. @Greg, I never used the term “dark” money, nor am I worried that anybody in town will use PACs in an illegal or improper way.
What I am concerned about is this: The purpose of a PAC is to provide more financial resources to those endorsed by the PAC, either directly to candidates or indirectly by advocating for policy positions they espouse. Those resources extend the giving power of individuals beyond the legal limits of individual contributions to candidates. In so doing, they enhance the political power of people (i.e., donors) of greater financial means.
The question I ask is whether we want that to be the new norm in municipal elections in Newton. I also would ask candidates supported by PACS –especially those who have expressed concerns about social equity–to expressly set forth why they are comfortable receiving this kind of help.
@Paul: I understand your concern and it’s legitimate.
But of course, it doesn’t always work that way. For example; I’m considering donating to the Democratic Senate Majority PAC because I would like to see the US Senate flipped blue. I will probably never give to individual senate candidates in other states because (a) I’m not sure I have enough knowledge to select the campaigns that need it or would benefit the most and (b) the individual contests are not as important to me as is the overall value of taking the Senate out of Republican hands.
Can’t the same can be true locally? Folks who may not choose to give to an individual campaign or multiple campaigns might choose to support a PAC because they decide that’s the best, one-stop, way to achieve their overall goal and get the biggest bang for their bucks. Now, it will take post election donation analysis to determine if that happens or not.
As for it being the “new norm,” that’s just not true. There have been election slates in Newton for as long as I can recall. It’s just easier to find out the details these days because it’s all online.
@greg, we don’t often agree here on V14, but the 2Pac thumbnail is baller!! Nicely played.
Overall, I think more PACs will have a deleterious and negative impact on Newton politics.
That being said, these PACs seem to be supporting either anti-development candidates (Newton Democracy PAC) or pro-development candidates (Voters for a Vibrant Newton PAC). The NIMBYs behind the Newton Democracy PAC came first and left the pro-development crowd no choice but to respond in-kind.
It is too bad and an unfortunate evolution for our city. But I do commend the organizers of the VVN PAC for at least being open and transparent about who put their group together and what they seek to accomplish. ND PAC has issued no press release and seem to have no chair person or public face.
@Jerry I agree with you. But perhaps I don’t understand the reasoning or I am missing something important here.
Could Lisa Gordon and/or Simon and Allison Sharma explain why they felt the need to start a PAC rather than donate to specific candidates?
@Greg – it is a “legal path to express their collective values. Totally legal and legit.”
I get that it is legal but my question is why do we need this on a local level?
-jack
With 24 city council seats, I do think there’s a place for like minded citizens to want to stand up and say “here’s the candidates we believe in.”
PACs create a legal and transparent platform for doing so. The worry should be when groups spend money promoting a slate without forming a PAC.
And I don’t speak for Vibrant Newton, but I believe they’ve already said they formed in response to Lisa Gordon’s PAC.
@Jack – It was just a bad joke .
I agree, it’s totally legal and legitimate, but not something that I see as helpful. Anything that fosters a permanent two-opposing-teams model for local politics isn’t something I’d like to see encouraged. When politics works well, today’s opponents on one issue become tomorrow’s allies on a different issue.
@Greg
Lets just be crystal clear.
The Newton Democracy PAC is not Lisa Gordons PAC.
Lisa has absolutely no involvement in Newton Democracy.
She is running her own Campaign to get elected as Ward 6 Councilor
@Jack
I have found many people have absolutely no idea what is going on in Newton Politics. They struggle to understand who they can even vote for. They just want to know who they should vote for. We attempt to offer a guide..
@Simon: Thanks for the clarification. So noted. But let’s also clarify that Lisa formed the PAC and later stepped down to run for city council, correct?
@Greg,
You are correct. It would be illegal for Lisa to be the treasurer of the PAC and run for the Councilor seat. So lets stop associating Lisa with the PAC.
@all: In the perfect world I would like to see a PAC formed that promotes all of the residents and businesses fairly, supporting candidates that are Independent thinkers who can’t be labeled as “this or that.” The PAC would seek candidates that the current two PAC’s ignore, but when residents have a challenge that has come into their lives, or businesses need a quick voice to defend their turf, their candidate is the one that gets it done. The candidates should know of all of the departments in the city, their key people, and even “who” at Eversource and NGrid to call when the need is there!! The candidates that are truly there for their commitment to Community Service.
Then hopefully that PAC would endorse my candidacy!!!!
Simon, a quick search on OCPF indicates that Lisa Gordon was the original chair and treasurer of the PAC. It appears she may have used her address as the original mailing address for the PAC.
This at least WAS Lisa Gordon’s PAC.
To be clear, just because a person has his/her name on a list doesn’t mean that s/he agrees with everything related to the PAC. One might agree in concept and think differently about some of the details. Let’s be reasonable and not place everyone in two opposing boxes – leading to more divisiveness at a point in time when it rules the day at the local, state, and national levels. If a PAC required total allegiance to every aspect, the list would probably be much shorter.
@Ryan
Yes, As per previous posts. So?
@Ryan thanks for the clarification, Lisa Gordon started the original PAC here in Newton and was the original Chair and Treasurer.
@Jane… The question that still needs to be answered is WHY? Why did Lisa Gordon feel the need to start a PAC and bring this into Newton politics?
@LisaGordon, as a candidate and in the name of transparency, can you please answer why you felt the need to go around the standard donations process and start a PAC?
@Simon
So? I think these PACS are a bad thing for Newton. But at least Voters for a Vibrant Newton are being crystal clear about who they are and what they are trying to do.
You also haven’t disclosed here that you are currently the Treasurer for both the NDPAC and Lisa Gordon’s campaign.
Lisa founded the PAC and you serve as Treasurer for both. Yet you are asking us to “stop associating Lisa with the PAC”??
Personally I’m fine with the creation of both PACs. Does it over simply the issues? Sure, but you’d be surprised how many of our residents have NO IDEA who the vote for come Nov 5th.
When reviewing both, one thing sort of stuck out regarding the Vibrant Newton PAC.
https://patch.com/massachusetts/newton/voters-vibrant-newton-endorses-candidates-november
The first 3 of 4 “values” they support I completely agree with. I mean, who doesn’t want (Newton) to be open/welcoming, have vibrant village centers, and be eco-friendly??
The 4th (solid fiscal footing) sort of contradicts the first 3. All of those things cost money.
It’s been recently shared that financially, it costs the city more than support the kids coming from Avalon than the tax revenue coming in. So while it’s great to have more housing to support points 1, 2 and 3, is it not fiscally irresponsible for Northland, Riverside and Washington Street to add more kids than the tax revenue the Developers would help fund? And doesn’t a higher mix of commercial (tax base) bring in more revenue to do points 1-3?
#DoesNotCompute
Looking at OCPF, it does not seem clear that Lisa Gordon resigned as NDPAC Treasurer before she became a candidate for City Council. I did not know this was illegal. It sounds like you should clarify what happened here right away as Treasurer of both efforts.
@Ryan,
Firstly, In full disclosure, I am also Lisa Gordons Treasurer. When she decided to run I got the job of being a treasurer for two campaigns.
Here is the link to contact page at OCPF https://www.ocpf.us/Home/ContactUs
I suspect they are done for the day today. Why don’t you call them tomorrow. Then perhaps you can post back here and let people know what they have to say.
It saddens me people can get so malicious. You even got 2 likes. It makes me wonder whats at stake for you or a company to might represent. Perhaps I should take a look! Don’t worry, I wont post back here what I find. That would be negative, and we are not going that way.
@Simon
I am not a treasurer for a City Council candidate or a PAC. I am not running for office. It is not my obligation to “let people know” the answers to questions about your campaign(s). I am a private citizen and retired, since you’re curious. Answering questions would be your obligation and not mine.
By the way, there is nothing “malicious” about asking people in a public role like yourself for some transparency. I have said nothing negative about you or Lisa Gordon.
@ Ryan,
I don’t know why you keep trying to mischaracterize what happened. I will say it again, even more clearly than in my prior comment. Lisa responded to the call from Newton voters who felt disenfranchised and wanted to take a stand as a group in a totally transparent way. Lisa later decided to run for office and, as a result, quite properly promptly resigned from the newly formed PAC because she recognized that, as a candidate, she should no longer be involved in a PAC. I took over from there. Lisa was completely transparent — and fully compliant— in what she did. This has been fully vetted by the OCPF.
@Simon: Thanks for clarifying the connection between Lisa Gordon and her former PAC. I believe PACs are not supposed to coordinate with campaigns, as the treasurer for both what’s your strategy for achieving that?
Also, two days ago you said you would be sharing your donation policy. I can’t seem to find it on your site. Is it there and I’m missing it. Or is it still coming?
@Greg
I’ve stated an number of times the OCPF are aware of the situation, and at this stage they know me quite well as I’m in regular contact with them on various matters. I’m going to leave it at that.
With regard to the donation policy, wording is in the works.
I’ve looked at both PACs and I have to say I’m not really impressed with either PAC. I disagree with Newton Democracy that high density housing is a bad thing (though I concede that we need to significantly improve our public transit to sustain it) since I’ve lived in Japan and I never was bothered by its high density and I don’t like promoting “right-size development” since I’m worried that will come at a cost of affordable units. I also disagree with Voters for a Vibrant Newton that we need a “broader range of housing options” since it’s disproportionately working class and lower middle class residents being displaced in Newton and all across the Greater Boston area and not upper middle class and wealthy residents being displaced (from what I’ve been hearing from my friends, apartment complexes with units starting at $4,000 tend to have higher than average vacancy rates). From what I’ve seen, Newton Democracy does a good job citing specifics on housing policy while VVD does a good job touching on multiple issues. However, I’m rather disappointed with both of these PACs since neither of them talk specifically about transportation. While VVD at least talks about transportation, saying “more efficient modes of transportation” is incredibly vague and offers no specifics whatsoever. Frankly, I find it appalling that the only times I’ve heard about transportation so far is when Jake Auchincloss endorsed Option 6 (https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/2019-10/railvision_alt6_0.pdf) of the Rail Vision plan during the Ward 2 at-large debate (https://player.vimeo.com/video/364162259) and when Bryan Barash posted about getting non-fixed route service implemented in Newton (https://www.facebook.com/bryanbarash/posts/10162455506765542?__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARDOWuN3trsatjM4MorYUfdOykjD9Zq6PObwkAHDjpLs8lHa2snIpzZNXiWvSs5nWnY11PXzceDL5AXDYsArsmbejpH8L99Nggc1WZ1qN09gdycF2qfQDaQtYT55ZEa3Qd97zmhjXwFL2dbnoGEH-tIwSDnjdCkGb2Il7UBak18e6uhOdaPEXZHNeqCDJiUNwT3J09aj1C2A_CJ-xA&__tn__=-R). While I admit I haven’t followed all the races extremely closely, its frankly disturbing that transportation isn’t brought up much during this election cycle (except traffic congestion).
Terry,
While Jake has certainly been a leader, transportation has been a focus of numerous candidates, most notably Andreae Downs and Alicia Bowman, two long-time veterans of the mayor’s Transportation Advisory Group. Bryan has been very vocal about the need for improved transit as has Emily Norton. Multiple candidates have been very supportive of fixing the three commuter-rail stations to convert them to two-track stations, a necessary prerequisite for more frequent service.
I hit the send button too early.
Brenda Noel doesn’t go a debate without talking about the need to make it possible to live car-lite in Newton. While it’s completely infeasible, Lisa Gordon has proposed on-demand shuttles to get her kids to Marshalls.
Bill Humphrey talks regularly about the need for transportation solutions for large developments. And, Kathy Winters is maybe the only candidate who regularly talks about the need to redesign sidewalks and intersections.
It’s a topic that’s near and dear to me. So, you can’t get too much transportation discussion. But, I don’t think it’s fair to say it’s neglected.
I’d like to hear from all Newton-based PAC’s on whether they had any connection to the GOPWard3 email. A simple yes or no would help rule out local PAC involvement.
People can check out Newton-based PACs by going to https://www.ocpf.us/Filers/ and typing “Newton” into the search window.
Note that this search wouldn’t list Save Nonantum PAC or any other Newton-based PAC which doesn’t have “Newton” as part of its name.