As the Boston mayoral contest intensifies, allegations of unlawful coordination between rival campaigns and super PACs have raised significant concerns regarding campaign finance compliance.
Mayor Michelle Wu contends that chief rival Josh Kraft’s campaign is unlawfully coordinating with the super PAC Your City, Your Future, which has directed millions towards negative advertising against her.
Wu has also criticized the Kraft campaign for fundraising emails that she described as misleading.
In response, the Kraft campaign has denied these allegations and has accused Wu’s campaign of coordinating with a super PAC during her 2021 mayoral run.
Additionally, they claim Wu has improperly utilized public funds by allegedly allowing public employees to engage in campaign activities during work hours.
The Wu campaign has categorically denied these claims.
When inquiries were made regarding the timeframe for addressing complaints, Tait noted that the statute governing the Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF) stipulates that any alleged violation must be presented to the attorney general no later than 120 days before or within three years after the relevant election.
However, Tait admitted that referrals to the attorney general occur infrequently.
Most cases, according to Tait, are resolved through a public resolution letter, where OCPF concludes that there is “no reason to believe” a violation occurred, or they find a violation but opt for informal settlement.
This means most complaints may not reach a resolution until after the election, which raises questions about the incentive to comply with campaign finance laws.
Geoff Foster, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts, expressed a need for OCPF to take credible and serious violations more seriously, indicating that if investigations can lead to timely resolutions, the public is entitled to know the outcomes.
Thomas Dwyer, a Boston defense attorney with experience in campaign finance, emphasized that OCPF possesses significant authority to hold candidates accountable quickly but noted the agency’s reluctance to exercise that power.
He attributed this hesitance to the nature of its leadership, explaining that the director is appointed by a bipartisan commission which includes various state officials and party chairs.
Current director William C. Campbell, appointed in 2021, has emphasized his nonpartisan stance, claiming he has experience with both major political parties.
Despite this claim, Campbell and OCPF’s lack of urgency in addressing complaints during a competitive mayoral race has drawn criticism.
the role of super PACs is becoming increasingly significant in the current Boston mayoral election.
Recent reports reveal that the super PAC supporting Kraft has received substantial financial backing from affluent associates of Robert Kraft, owner of the New England Patriots.
Evidence suggesting potential illegal coordination between the Kraft campaign and the super PAC has come to light.
On the other side, Wu’s campaign benefits from the super PAC Bold Boston, which is funded by unions and environmental organizations.
Additionally, a new super PAC supporting Wu has been proposed by consultant Malia Lazu.
Maurice Cunningham, an author and critic focused on the influence of money in politics, argued that while avoiding intervention in elections was previously justifiable for OCPF, the current circumstances necessitate prioritizing public disclosure.
He stressed the importance of ensuring transparent oversight of campaign finances to uphold the integrity of the electoral process.
In light of existing laws governing campaign financing and the mandate for state regulators to enforce those, many believe OCPF should take a more proactive approach that truly informs and benefits the electorate.
With the mayoral race growing ever closer, the urgency of these issues cannot be understated.
image source from：bostonglobe
