EXHIBIT C

The Committee for Responsible Development

c/o Simon French
47 Glen Avenue
Newton, MA, 02459

February 13, 2020

BY HAND

Gregory Birne, Esq.

General Counsel
Office of Campaign and Political Finance
John W. McCormack Building
One Ashburton Place, Room 411
Boston, MA 02108

Re: City of Newton

Ballot Summary for March 3, 2020 Special Election

Dear Mr. Birne:

On behalf of the Committee for Responsible Development (hereinafter the

“Committee”), I would like to file a complaint regarding unlawful use of public resources by the
City of Newton, to influence voters concerning a ballot question (hereinafter the “Northland
Referendum”) which will ask Newton voters whether to repeal a zoning amendment approved by
the Newton City Council in connection with a proposed development (hereinafter the “Northland
Development”). The Committee was formed to support repeal of the zoning amendment.

Since the instant complaint concerns an internet link within the Ballot Summary that the
City of Newton intends to distribute to Newton voters prior to the Special Election scheduled for
March 3, 2020, and which link the Committee believes violates MGL. c.53, §18B because it not
“fair,” and violates MGL. c. 55, it is imperative that the Office of Campaign and Political
Finance take immediate action hereon1.

On January 30, 2020, the Legal Department of the City of Newton provided to the
Committee the Ballot Summary that the City intends to distribute to Newton voters in connection
with the Newton Special Election on March 3, 2020 regarding the Northland Referendum. A
copy of the Transmittal Email and the Ballot Summary are attached as Exhibit A. The Ballot
Summary directs voters to pages on the City’s website that relate to the subject of the
Referendum (www.newtonma.gov/northlandproject), to obtain additional related information.
This website contains a link to what the city considers “the official record of all documents
submitted (Plans, Zoning Review, Applications, Memos) to the City Council’s Land Use
Committee for the Northland Project” (emphasis in the original) However, at the time, those
pages contained the identity of, and links to, documents provided to the City Council by the

1
It was not until this past Monday, February 10, that it became apparent that the City would not agree to change the
Ballot Summary as requested.
Gregory Birne, Esq.
February 13, 2020
Page 2 of 4

City’s Planning Department and the Special Permit Petitioner, but not to any documents
provided by RightSize Newton, a group that had opposed the Special Permit. A copy of the
relevant pages on the City’s website on January 30 is attached as Exhibit B.

The very next day, January 31, 2020, the Committee requested that documents, which
had been submitted formally to the Newton Planning Department, the City Council’s Land Use
Committee or the City Council by RightSize Newton, be added to the links identified on the
City’s Northland webpage. A copy of the email to the Legal Department is attached as Exhibit
C. The documents to be identified were enclosed as attachments to that email.

Several days later, on or about February 6, 2020, documents submitted by RightSize

Newton were added to the relevant City webpages but as a “combined” submission consisting of
88 pages (“Right Size Newton Submissions – Combined”), rather than separately,
chronologically and topically, and without appropriate links thereto as the other submissions
(from the Petitioner) were already presented. A copy of the relevant pages on the City’s website
on or about February 6 is attached as Exhibit D. The Committee then again requested that the
City webpage be changed, but no later than Monday, February 10, but no change was made. See
email to Asst. City Solicitor dated February 7 attached as Exhibit E.

As a result, it will be very difficult for interested individuals to find RightSize Newton’s
comments and/or arguments pertaining to specific issues raised by Northland’s proposal and the
Planning Department’s and City Council’s actions thereon. That is very different from the links
provided to Northland’s individual submissions and the generally Northland supportive, though
often inaccurate or incomplete, individual submissions of the City’s Planning Department which
are presented both topically and individually, listed by date. Considering that each of RightSize
Newton’s submissions were provided to the Legal Department separately with our original email
in this regard, the failure to provide individual links to those submissions was even more
egregious. Furthermore, several websites (e.g. lwvnewton.org) are linking to those City website
pages and using them as their source of all information pertaining to the project and, to the belief
of the Committee, one or more Newton City officials are aware of that fact.

The Ballot Summary is therefore not “fair” as required by MGL. c.53, §18B, and its use
by the City in connection with the Special Election violates Massachusetts General Law c. 55,
the Massachusetts Campaign Finance Law, which places restrictions on the use of governmental
resources for political purposes. Specifically, according to Interpretive Bulletin 91-01 of the
Office of Campaign and Political Finance, entitled “The Use of Governmental Resources for
Political Purposes”, MGL c. 55 prohibits “the use of governmental resources for political
purposes” which included the making of “expenditures to promote or oppose a matter placed
before voters at the polls, such as a ballot question.” As further explained:

The prohibition applies whether the material that is distributed advocates for or against a
questions (it is “advocacy”) or simply purports to be objective and factual (it is
“informational”)…As for informational material, distribution is prohibited unless
consistent with section 18B…
Gregory Birne, Esq.
February 13, 2020
Page 3 of 4

Moreover, the Office of Campaign and Political Finance should consider this violation by
the City of Newton in the context of other actions by the City Government and City Officials
which improperly evidenced their support for the Board Order which is the subject of the
Referendum and at the heart of this matter, and improperly attempted to thwart efforts at
opposition.

 Prior to the last City Council election this past November, the City Solicitor
advised Councilors running for reelection that they should not disclose to voters
whether they supported or opposed the Special Permit Application that underlies
the Referendum at issue. In an editorial, the Boston Globe criticized that advice
saying it had no legal basis and that Newton voters had the right to know the
positions of those running for public office. The undersigned asked, in writing,
that the City Solicitor publically disclose the basis for her instructions, and for
additional information regarding the obligations of city councilors acting,
allegedly, in a quasi-judicial role. See Exhibit F. No response from the City
Solicitor has been received to date.

 During the signature gathering drive for the Referendum, one City Councilor told
an individual it was unlawful to be collecting signatures on a supermarket’s
property. The City Councilor then complained to store personnel who asked the
individual collecting the signatures to leave the property. At some time the City
Councilor had indicated her official position. A complaint was filed with the
Newton City Solicitor’s office on December 9, 2019. It then took the City
Solicitor’s Office until December 16 to respond and say that City Councilors
would be advised of the rights of signature gatherers. See Exhibit G. Thus, it took
a full seven of the 20 days allowed for signature gathering before the City
Councilors were so advised, leaving only an additional seven days.

 After the requisite number of signatures were gathered for the Referendum, the
Mayor of Newton issued a statement on the City’s website opposing the
referendum. A complaint was filed with the Office of Campaign and Political
Finance, claiming a violation of M.G.L. c 55 which prohibits the use of “public
resources to engage in a campaign to influence voters concerning a ballot
question”. See Exhibit H. Although the Mayor has since removed the statement,
the Complaint appears to be still pending.

 Just this week, a Complaint was filed with the Office of the Attorney General
which alleges that the Newton City Council violated the Open Meeting Law in
scheduling the Special Election regarding the Referendum on March 3, 2020. See
Exhibit I, with Exhibits A and B thereto.