Letter spurs debate over public officials’ advocacy on election

loading...

BANGOR – A letter from local school Superintendent Robert Ervin warning parents about the “dire consequences” of the proposed property tax cap is fueling more debate over whether public officials are overstepping their bounds in attempting to influence the outcome of the election.

While Ervin said he has a responsibility to notify the parents of schoolchildren about the repercussions of the so-called Palesky initiative on the school district, supporters of the controversial proposal contend officials are trying to sway voters instead of releasing balanced information.

According to the superintendent’s letter, which was sent home with students earlier this month, the tax cap will result in the loss of jobs; art, music and physical education programs; and extracurricular activities including athletics, among other things.

“I strongly urge you to oppose the tax cap … and to tell neighbors in Bangor and elsewhere that this tax cap proposal will seriously cripple the education of our children,” Ervin said in the letter.

The tax cap referendum was initiated by a citizen petition and will be on the Nov. 2 state ballot. If it passes, it will cap property taxes at 1 percent of their assessed value.

During an interview this week, the superintendent said he had discussed the repercussions of the proposed cap during a recent school committee meeting that had been covered by the Bangor Daily News but felt he needed to follow up with parents. “I wanted to make sure they all got the same kind of information in a uniform way.”

Ervin said his “first responsibility … is to let the people who will be most affected know what the impact of the tax cap initiative is going to be. It’s really an obligation.”

He added, “For the public to sit there and wonder what was going on without hearing from the school department isn’t very responsible.”

But Mark Gartley, a volunteer with Tax Cap YES! – a group supporting the initiative – said the letter is “dressing up advocacy in a suit of information.” He said the other side of the controversial proposal wasn’t included in the letter and that opponents of the tax cap are painting a worst-case scenario to frighten people.

“I’m sure some school resources were used to produce this letter in terms of time and materials,” he added, referring to the use of public funds to oppose a political issue that some taxpayers support.

Ervin said he had been mindful about using public dollars. “The issue there is one of degrees. … I think the message is so important to get out to parents … that the cost of the paper is insignificant in terms of letting people know.”

Meanwhile, a new television ad featuring Camden area teacher Carole Gartley began airing Wednesday. (She said she is remotely related to Mark Gartley through her husband.) In the commercial, Carole Gartley, who has taught for 15 years, says she’s “never seen a bigger threat to public education” than the Palesky initiative. The ad is paid for by the political action committee, Citizens United to Protect Our Public Safety, Schools and Communities.

And educators aren’t the only public employees who have been voicing their concerns about the tax cap initiative.

Faced with growing opposition from state and municipal officials and workers who also have been trying to influence voters against the measure, the Tax Cap YES! organization asked Attorney General Steven Rowe in late August to issue an opinion on the legality of their activities.

In a response released Sept. 10, Rowe said government bodies and officials may not spend public dollars to advocate for or against a citizen initiative “without express authorization.” But he said it is legally permissible for them to express their views on the impact of the tax cap as part of their “obligation” as public officials.

He added, “They may disseminate information on matters such as citizen initiatives and may express their views as public officials. We have found no case concluding that public resources such as personnel time cannot be used in support of these allowable activities.”

Dale Douglass, executive director of the Maine School Management Association, said superintendents who take public stances against the tax cap “are being true to the attorney general’s opinion.”

Douglass, whose group represents superintendents and school boards, said, “If the proponents of the tax cap have information that is as specific and as factual as being presented by town and school officials, they have the right to present that. We haven’t seen those presentations.”

University of Maine School of Law Professor Orlando Delogu, who has been a consultant to Tax Cap YES!, acknowledged Wednesday that public officials have a First Amendment right to discuss issues.

“But the information must be fair and balanced and must avoid advocacy, [not be] skewed to the presentation of a worst-case scenario aimed really at fomenting a no-vote comment,” he said.

While there are certain advantages to this form of relief, there also are negatives to it, he said. “But we’re not getting any fair and balanced presentation. It’s a full-court press to generate a no vote.”

He said he was concerned about the fact that “it doesn’t bother the school district to send this home with third-graders.”

For Martha Newman, chairman of the Bangor school board which asked the superintendent to inform voters about the effects of the tax cap, the issue is cut and dried.

“There are no benefits to the cap. If there were two sides we would have included that. There aren’t. If people take the truth in that letter as advocacy, that’s up to them,” she said.

“I’m more worried about parents saying to me after Palesky passes, ‘Why didn’t you tell me how bad this would be?’ than I am worried about informing them of the results of Palesky.”

Ervin, who plans to discuss the tax cap issue with parent-teacher organizations and booster clubs, has asked teachers to refrain from engaging in conversations with students about the tax cap.

“I would think that’s inappropriate unless it’s debated in some kind of objective forum where both pro and con are presented, such as a civics class,” he said.

Meanwhile, some teachers have told him that parents appreciated the letter.

“They said, ‘Thank you, we didn’t understand what was going on,”‘ the superintendent said.