Expenditure Totals

The following Information comes by way of Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jason Tait
Nov. 15, 2012 Director of Communications
617-979-8300

BOSTON – Unions and associations reported making $782,052 in independent expenditures to support or oppose 114 legislative candidates this year.

In addition, five Independent Expenditure Political Action Committees, known as Super PACs, reported $200,923 in expenditures.

Independent expenditures are expenditures made to expressly advocate the election or defeat of candidates, and are made without coordinating with a candidate’s campaign. This spending is disclosed electronically on CPF18A forms (link to reports: 18As).

Independent expenditure PACs are political committees that raise and spend money to make independent expenditures, which are also disclosed electronically on regular campaign finance reports.

The Massachusetts Teachers Association reported the highest total amount of independent expenditures this year: $309,976. The union also contributed $75,000 to the Mass Values Independent Expenditure PAC.

The 1199 SEIU union reported spending the second highest amount at $204,524, and also added $75,000 to the Mass Values IEPAC. SEIU Local 509 reported $153,489 in independent expenditures and made a $10,000 contribution to the Mass Values IEPAC.

The majority of independent expenditures in 2012 were made to support candidates. However, 11 expenditures were made to oppose candidates, four by the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance and one by SEIU Local 509. The Mass Values IEPAC also reported spending $53,758 to oppose six candidates. Of the top 20 candidates supported by independent expenditures, 14 won their races.

The 2012 total is $256,786 higher than in 2008 – the last non-statewide election year. Traditionally, independent expenditures are highest during statewide election years. In 2010 they topped $3.7 million, when a majority of all expenditures were made to support or oppose gubernatorial candidates.

No business corporations reported spending money directly on independent expenditures, despite a US Supreme Court (Citizens United) ruling in 2010 that allowed corporations to make independent expenditures to expressly advocate for or against candidates. In addition to independent expenditures, four groups reported making $34,381 in electioneering communication expenditures – Coalition for Marriage and Family, Education Reform Now Action, Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance and New Jobs for Massachusetts Inc.

Electioneering communications, also known as issue ads, are mailings or advertisements that clearly identify a candidate within 90 days of an election but do not expressly advocate for or against the candidate.

OCPF is an independent non-partisan state agency that administers the state’s campaign finance law. The agency is located at One Ashburton Place, Room 411, on Beacon Hill.

Greater Lowell Tech School Committee Chairman Victor Olson has NOT held any meeting of the board nor emailed his fellow Committee members to inform them of ANY Investigation into the harassment charges leveled at Committeeman Erik Gitschier and Mr. Gitschier has NOT been contacted by anyone from the schools HR dept or Law firm to answer any questions about these allegations.

It has been over a month since Supt. Santoro at a School Committee meeting on October 11th, said she felt as though she was being harassed and discriminated against because she is a woman by School Committee member Erik Gitschier.

In an October 23rd article in the Lowell Sun Chairman Victor Olson stated the school’s attorneys and Human Resources Department will jointly conduct a fact-finding investigation.

Two School Committee members I communicated with yesterday informed me that neither had received any notification of an investigation and on City Life Committeeman George O’Hare sounded like he was surprised and critical of Fred Bahou’s motion on tonight’s agenda stating after a month with nothing happening why bring it up?

In addition Erik Gitschier confirmed to me yesterday that while he did receive an email from the chair stating these charges would be investigated, no one from the schools Hr dept. or law firm has contacted him about these allegations.

He did ask that if an investigation take place it be conducted by an independent third party.

Mr. Gitschier added the reason he has not asked the full committee for an outside their party is “because I believe that would require a committee vote. I believe that would be a violation of the open meeting law if I sent a letter. I did send an email to the Chairman asking for an outside third party investigation.”

Can the Chairman conduct an investigation on his own? Is it fair to ask the schools Law firm whom Erik questioned about their billing and hourly rate increase to conduct this investigation?

Fred Bahou deserve props for making the motion and the entire School Committee needs to wake up and take this matter serious.

The Superintendent has made charges that affect ALL MALE members and could have lasting effects on Mr. Gitschiers personal and professional life and this needs to be investigated 100% without any involvement of any party or group that could be seen as being partial to one side or another.

It has been noted to be by ‘outsiders” that these allegations came at Mr. Lenzi’s last meeting shortly after a mystery person sent out copies of his License and registration showing his Cape Cod address.

Are these allegations the latest in a series of political infighting and highlights the great divide that exist at that school.

With rumors circulating of Asst. Supt. / Principal Dave Lussier retiring at years end and the Supt. contract expiring the Committee as a whole needs to address this matter and resolve it before they find themselves unable to act on rehiring or hiring the Supt. and Asst. Supt. due to ongoing legal matters.

The Superintendent has drawn a line and now either Mr. Gitschier must be cleared or found in the wrong or Supt. Santoro must be removed for gross insubordination.

Right now all that we see is the Chairman’s ineptness in dealing with these charges.