Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 169 / Act 388 of 1976

Mich. Comp. Laws § 169.257

Contributions, expenditures, or volunteer personal services; prohibitions; communication referencing local ballot questions; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN CAMPAIGN FINANCE ACT


Act 388 of 1976


169.257 Contributions, expenditures, or volunteer personal services; prohibitions; communication referencing local ballot questions; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.

Sec. 57.

    (1) A public body or a person acting for a public body shall not use or authorize the use of funds, personnel, office space, computer hardware or software, property, stationery, postage, vehicles, equipment, supplies, or other public resources to make a contribution or expenditure or provide volunteer personal services that are excluded from the definition of contribution under section 4(3)(a). This subsection does not apply to any of the following:

    (a) The expression of views by an elected or appointed public official who has policy making responsibilities.

    (b) Subject to subsection (2), the production or dissemination of factual information concerning issues relevant to the function of the public body.

    (c) The production or dissemination of debates, interviews, commentary, or information by a broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical or publication in the regular course of broadcasting or publication.

    (d) The use of a public facility owned or leased by, or on behalf of, a public body if any candidate or committee has an equal opportunity to use the public facility.

    (e) The use of a public facility owned or leased by, or on behalf of, a public body if that facility is primarily used as a family dwelling and is not used to conduct a fund-raising event.

    (f) An elected or appointed public official or an employee of a public body who, when not acting for a public body but is on the public official's or employee's personal time, is expressing the public official's or employee's personal views, is expending the public official's or employee's personal funds, or is providing the public official's or employee's personal volunteer services.

    (g) If an individual who is contributing to a separate segregated fund affirmatively consents to the contribution, the use of public resources to establish and administer a payroll deduction plan to directly or indirectly collect a contribution to, or make an expenditure for, a committee. Affirmative consent does not expire until revoked by the individual who provides the affirmative consent.

    (2) Except for an election official in the performance of the election official's duties under the Michigan election law, 1954 PA 116, MCL 168.1 to 168.992, a public body, or a person acting for a public body, shall not, during the period 60 days before an election in which a local ballot question appears on a ballot, use public funds or resources for a communication by means of radio, television, mass mailing, or prerecorded telephone message if that communication references a local ballot question and is targeted to the relevant electorate where the local ballot question appears on the ballot.

    (3) A person that knowingly violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable, if the person is an individual, by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both, or if the person is not an individual, by 1 of the following, whichever is greater:

    (a) A fine of not more than $20,000.00.

    (b) A fine equal to the amount of the improper contribution or expenditure.

    

History: Add. 1995, Act 264, Eff. Mar. 28, 1996 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 590, Eff. Mar. 31, 1997 ;-- Am. 2001, Act 250, Eff. Mar. 22, 2002 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 31, Imd. Eff. Feb. 28, 2012 ;-- Am. 2015, Act 269, Imd. Eff. Jan. 6, 2016 ;-- Am. 2023, Act 244, Eff. Feb. 13, 2024

Compiler's Notes:

    Section 2 of Act 264 of 1995 provides:

    “If any portion of this amendatory act or the application of this amendatory act to any person or circumstance is found to be invalid by a court, the invalidity does not affect the remaining portions or applications of this amendatory act that can be given effect without the invalid portion or application, if those remaining portions are not determined by the court to be inoperable. To this end, this amendatory act is declared to be severable.”

    Enacting section 1 of Act 31 of 2012 provides:

    "Enacting section 1. It is the policy of this state that a public body shall maintain strict neutrality in each election and that a public body or a person acting on behalf of a public body shall not attempt to influence the outcome of an election held in the state. If there is a perceived ambiguity in the interpretation of section 57, that section shall be construed to best effectuate the policy of strict neutrality by a public body in an election."

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2024 · leading case: Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State (2010) mich · cites it 45× “Thus, the school district’s payroll deduction plan is prohibited by MCL 169.257. This interpretation is consistent not only with the language of the statute, but also with the evident purpose of § 57, which is to mandate the separation of the government from politics in order to…”
Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State (2008) michctapp · cites it 20× “The MEA detailed the facts concerning the Gull Lake Public Schools summarized above and asserted that the administration of the payroll deductions by the school district did not "constitute an `expenditure' under the MCFA" and did not constitute a violation of § 57 of the MCFA,…”
Michigan Education Association v. Secretary of State (2010) mich · cites it 34× “The MEA detailed its proposal for payroll deductions to be made by the Gull Lake Public Schools and asserted that the administration of the payroll deductions by the school district would not be an “expenditure” under the MCFA and would not violate § 57 of the MCFA, MCL 169.257.…”
Citizens for Common Sense in Government v. Attorney General (2000) michctapp · cites it 2× “Section 57 of the Michigan Campaign Finance Act (mofa), MCL 169.257; MSA 4.1703(57), prohibits public bodies, such as the mml’s membership, from directly spending money to influence a ballot proposal.”
In re Brennan (2019) mich “" Section 57 of the Campaign Finance Act, MCL 169.257(1), provides, in part, as follows: A public body or a person acting for a public body shall not use or authorize the use of funds, personnel, office space, computer hardware or software, property, stationery, postage,…”
Michigan Education Association v. Secretary of State (2011) mich · cites it 45× “Thus, the school district’s payroll deduction plan is prohibited by MCL 169.257. This interpretation is consistent not only with the language of the statute, but also with the evident purpose of § 57, which is to mandate the separation of the government from politics in order to…”
MICHIGAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. Secretary of State (2009) mich “206; (2) whether § 57(1) of the MCFA, MCL 169.257(1), prohibits a school district from expending government resources for such a payroll deduction plan if the costs of the plan are prepaid by the MEA; and (3) whether a school district has the authority to collect and deliver…”
Laura Green v. County of Grand Traverse (2020) michctapp “” Finally, Menzel sent a formal memorandum, advising Green that “[u]nder Michigan’s Campaign Finance Act, MCL 169.257 a person ‘acting for a public body shall not use or authorize the use of funds, personnel, office space, computer hardware or software, property, stationery,…”
Robert Davis v. Secretary of State (2024) michctapp “Except as otherwise provided in section 57, the remedies provided in this act are the exclusive 4 Plaintiff does not argue that the exceptions in MCL 169.257 apply here, and it appears that that provision is inapplicable because it generally regards the use of public resources…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 169.257(1) — 6 cases
Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State (2010) mich “Thus, the school district’s payroll deduction plan is prohibited by MCL 169.257. This interpretation is consistent not only with the language of the statute, but also with the evident purpose of § 57, which is to mandate the separation of the government from politics in order to…”
Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State (2008) michctapp “The MEA detailed the facts concerning the Gull Lake Public Schools summarized above and asserted that the administration of the payroll deductions by the school district did not "constitute an `expenditure' under the MCFA" and did not constitute a violation of § 57 of the MCFA,…”
Michigan Education Association v. Secretary of State (2010) mich “The MEA detailed its proposal for payroll deductions to be made by the Gull Lake Public Schools and asserted that the administration of the payroll deductions by the school district would not be an “expenditure” under the MCFA and would not violate § 57 of the MCFA, MCL 169.257.…”
In re Brennan (2019) mich “" Section 57 of the Campaign Finance Act, MCL 169.257(1), provides, in part, as follows: A public body or a person acting for a public body shall not use or authorize the use of funds, personnel, office space, computer hardware or software, property, stationery, postage,…”
Michigan Education Association v. Secretary of State (2011) mich “Thus, the school district’s payroll deduction plan is prohibited by MCL 169.257. This interpretation is consistent not only with the language of the statute, but also with the evident purpose of § 57, which is to mandate the separation of the government from politics in order to…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 169.257(1)(a) — 1 case
Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State (2008) michctapp “The MEA detailed the facts concerning the Gull Lake Public Schools summarized above and asserted that the administration of the payroll deductions by the school district did not "constitute an `expenditure' under the MCFA" and did not constitute a violation of § 57 of the MCFA,…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 169.257(2)(b) — 3 cases
Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State (2010) mich “Thus, the school district’s payroll deduction plan is prohibited by MCL 169.257. This interpretation is consistent not only with the language of the statute, but also with the evident purpose of § 57, which is to mandate the separation of the government from politics in order to…”
Michigan Education Association v. Secretary of State (2010) mich “The MEA detailed its proposal for payroll deductions to be made by the Gull Lake Public Schools and asserted that the administration of the payroll deductions by the school district would not be an “expenditure” under the MCFA and would not violate § 57 of the MCFA, MCL 169.257.…”
Michigan Education Association v. Secretary of State (2011) mich “Thus, the school district’s payroll deduction plan is prohibited by MCL 169.257. This interpretation is consistent not only with the language of the statute, but also with the evident purpose of § 57, which is to mandate the separation of the government from politics in order to…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 169.257(l)(a) — 1 case
Michigan Education Ass'n v. Secretary of State (2008) michctapp “The MEA detailed the facts concerning the Gull Lake Public Schools summarized above and asserted that the administration of the payroll deductions by the school district did not "constitute an `expenditure' under the MCFA" and did not constitute a violation of § 57 of the MCFA,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.