Using official govt email to electioneer?
That looks like what we may have going on here. We just had a pretty contentious city council election on November 4 here in Pinehurst.
John Taylor is the mayor pro tem for the Pinehurst Village Council. We received a screenshot of an email he sent out to a mailing list of at least 116 just days before Election Day:
This looks like one of the official email accounts assigned to council members for use in conducting official government business. This, right here, appears to be purely political. How can we be sure this came from a Pinehurst government account? We had our source right click on the sender name of “John Taylor” so we could learn more:
The originating address of this message was indeed John Taylor‘s village-assigned and maintained email account.
One could argue that a village email account IS a taxpayer-supported government asset. There is more than a little bit out there about political use of government assets.
Here’s a case from Wilmington where a New Hanover County commissioner was caught using his official email account urging constituents to vote for him:
[…] Both responses were sent through Rivenbark’s government email.
Political experts told WECT that because Rivenbark responded through his government email, asking constituents to explicitly vote for him, that’s a violation of North Carolina law.
“A fair reading of state law would say that the political use of government emails by county officials is prohibited,” Pope “Mac” McCorkle, a political policy professor at Duke University, said. […]
Here’s some commentary from the NC School of Government — a leading authority on how local governments should conduct themselves:
[…] May the mayor use her city-issued email account to send out a statement about her goals for the upcoming term if she is re-elected? No. Like the board meeting, the official email is a public resource and should not be used for political purposes. There may be some blurred lines between transacting the public business and running for re-election. Elected officials should exercise caution to avoid campaigning when using public resources. […]
The statutes contain three prohibitions:
- No employee while on duty or in the workplace may use his or her official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election or nomination for political office; or coerce, solicit, or compel contributions for political or partisan purposes by another employee.
- No employee may be required as a duty or condition of employment, promotion, or tenure of office to contribute funds for political or partisan purposes.
- No employee may use city/county funds, supplies, or equipment for partisan purposes, or for political purposes except where such political uses are otherwise permitted by law.
These statutory prohibitions relate to “political or partisan” activities. Another set of statutes (G.S. 160A-499.3 (cities), G.S. 153A-456 (counties), G.S. 115C-46.1 (schools) creates a broader prohibition regarding the use of public funds:
A [city/county/school] shall not use public funds to endorse or oppose a referendum, election or a particular candidate for elective office.[….]
