School dept. hit on override efforts

By Stephen Hagan

» Staff Writer

The Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance is slamming the Manchester Essex Regional School District for its staff resources to support a Proposition 2½ override measure in Essex earlier this year.

According to a Sept. 16 letter sent by OCPF to Manchester Essex Superintendent Pam Beaudoin, a review of “several complaints” was recently completed regarding the ballot question that was held on May 12.

“The complaints alleged that public resources, including staff time, supplies, school computers and school internet were used to support the ballot question,” the letter reads.

It also indicates that based on its review, OCPF determined that public resources, including staff time, computers, the internet and e-mail lists were used to compile information that discussed the impact of the ballot question and the process needed for approving the proposed article.

In its letter, OCPF cites case law to support its contention, including “Anderson v. City of Boston” in 1978 where the Supreme Judicial Court concluded that Boston could not use previously appropriated funds, designed for other purposes, to influence a ballot question during an election.

“Accordingly, this office has concluded that government entities may not expend public resources or contribute anything of value to influence or affect the outcome of a ballot question,” the letter continues.

Attempts to reach Beaudoin and School Committee Chair Chris Reed were unsuccessful before deadline Thursday.

But for at least one local, the school district could have avoided the situation.

“They were warned repeatedly during the campaign but forged ahead,” said Essex resident Maureen Flatley. “The School Committee is driving tax

SEE OVERRIDE, PA GE 2

Continued from Page 1

increases and spending in a community of 3,000 people in a strategy that is simply not sustainable.”

As someone who has spent a lifetime fighting for kids, she is a huge proponent of excellence in education, Flatley said.

“However, this past election cycle demonstrated that we need some guardrails,” she said.

Based on its review, OCPF determined that the use of MERSD staff time, e-mail lists, computers and “pop-up” information on the website to “proactively distribute information relative to a ballot question” was not consistent with Anderson and the provisions of state campaign finance law.

The letter further states that OCPF expects the review will ensure further compliance with campaign finance law and that “our review has been closed at this time.”

In addition to being an Essex resident, Flatley is also a consultant who specializes in child protection. She is concerned about what she sees as excessive spending in the school district. “The notion that the superintendent would literally run a campaign for the override from her office on school property was preposterous and reveals a real lack of regard for rules that have been on the books for quite some time,” Flatley said.

Voters in Essex approved the override question for the town and schools at Annual Town Meeting on May 5 and then also agreed to a measure to fund the schools during a ballot vote at Annual Town Election on May 12.

Stephen Hagan may be contacted at 978-675-2708, or shagan@ gloucestertimes.com.