City, PAC funding goes toward April 7 election effort

Cora Scott: City’s role is to put out factual information – not to persuade voters.

Marshall Kinne: Friends of SGF PAC has deployed digital ads, text messaging and signs to promote center.

• 
• 

In advance of the April 7 vote on a tax to fund a $175 million proposed downtown convention and events center, preelection communication efforts are ratcheting up, including direct mail campaigns, yard signs, social media ads and TV spots.

Political action committees target potential voters with a direct request for support, while city and tourism officials say they aim to provide information.

Springfield voters will be asked on April 7 to decide whether to impose a 3% license tax for hotels, motels and short-term rentals. If voters in the Springfield approve the tax, that will put the license tax at 8% for a total lodging tax of 16.1% in the city.

“Our role as a communication department is to put out factual information – not to persuade people one way or another,” said Cora Scott, Springfield director of public information and civic engagement.

Missouri law states public funds cannot be used to advocate for or against a ballot measure.

Scott said she has all election-related communications reviewed by the city’s legal department before releasing them to city residents.

The same informational approach is taken at Visit Springfield, Missouri, which promotes tourism and events in the city, according to Mark Hecquet, president and CEO. His goal is to help residents understand the implications of the tax on tourism, which he said is a $1 billion-plus industry that employs 20,000 people in the community.

Visit Springfield is a 501(c)6 nonprofit, a designation reserved for organizations that promote business interests, according to the IRS, and it receives funding from multiple sources, including the city of Springfield.

Hecquet said none of the organization’s advertising campaign suggests how people should vote.

“As an organization, our mission is to protect our tourism industry, and right now we’re making sure we are informing residents about the importance of tourism in our city,” he said.

Scott provided a breakdown of $6,435 in expenditures for the city’s ballot education efforts.

Costs include $2,973 to cover printing and postage for a direct mail postcard, $1,287 for a stuffer included in City Utilities of Springfield utility bills, and lesser expenditures for fliers, brochures, mailing service fees and a Q&A document.

Election costs will also be borne by the city, with $230,000 allocated toward that expense from carryover funds at the March 23 Springfield City Council meeting. According to past Springfield Business Journal reporting, that was also the approximate cost of the November 2025 election on the ballot measure, which failed.

Additionally, the city is paying a not-to-exceed amount of $375,000 for the services of architectural firm Populous Inc. to create a design for the center prior to the election.

Hecquet did not provide the total cost of education materials before SBJ’s publication time, although he did provide an estimate of cost of the TV spots. A copy of an invoice from KY3 for Visit Springfield, Missouri, obtained by SBJ, notes the cost of 29 spots on KY3 at $13,944.

PAC efforts

At least two political action committees – one familiar and one new – have gone to work in the city to advocate for construction of a downtown convention and events center.

The Committee for the Future PAC, operated by the Springfield Area Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, filed an amended statement of committee organization with the Missouri Ethics Commission on March 23 of this year and specified that it supports the 3% tourism tax increase.

Its most recent quarterly financial report, filed Jan. 8 with the MEC, showed money on hand of $92,544.

The Friends of SGF PAC filed its organization paperwork with the MEC on Feb. 25 with the stated purpose of supporting the 3% lodging tax. No financial report has yet been filed.

Neither PAC filed a report 40 days before the election, required by law for committee expenditures made before Feb. 21, possibly because they had not tallied any election-related expenditures yet. Another required report is due March 30, eight days before the election, for expenses through March 26.

Marshall Kinne, spokesperson for Friends of SGF, said that PAC is still soliciting community support for the campaign.

“We are very encouraged by the overwhelming positive response received so far,” he said.

So far, Friends of SGF has deployed digital advertising, text messaging and signs throughout the community, Kinne said.

He added that the PAC has received support from the Downtown Springfield Association, the Springfield Area Chamber of Commerce, the Springfield Firefighters Association, the Springfield Labor Council, the Springfield Hotel Lodging Association and other groups.

“We have a generational opportunity to invest in Springfield’s economy,” Kinne said. “The best part? It’s paid for by visitors, not Springfield residents.”

Gordon Elliott, CEO of hospitality company Elliott Lodging Ltd., is listed as treasurer for both PACs.

In an email interview, Elliott outlined his support for the center.

“The convention and events center is a generational opportunity, and a win-win for Springfield residents,” he said. “It will create significant economic activity for local businesses, permanent local jobs for Springfield workers, and it will be paid for by out-of-town visitors and not Springfield residents.”

Elliott said the campaign has received support from dozens of business and civic leaders, who will be listed in the campaign finance report due March 30.

An SBJ review of Missouri Ethics Commission registration records did not find evidence of any political action committees formed to oppose the lodging tax.


Advocacy law

Missouri law also takes a hard line against using public funds to advocate for or oppose a ballot initiative or a candidate, and that is illustrated in the prosecution of St. Louis County Executive Sam Page.

A news release on the Missouri Attorney General website alleges Page misused public resources to oppose Proposition B, a local ballot initiative presented to voters on April 8, 2025.

“The allegations include that Page purposely expended more than $35,000 in county funds to produce and distribute over 50,000 political mailers to sway the election outcome,” the AG website states.

At the heart of the case is a flyer explaining the ramifications of a “yes” or “no” vote on the issue. The flyer, still viewable on the St. Louis County government Facebook post from April 2, 2025, does not direct county residents in how to vote.

While Springfield officials maintain its materials are purely educational, Page’s defense team is citing a brochure produced and funded by the city of Springfield for the April 7 election to help prove Page’s innocence.

Missouri statute does allow public officials to make public appearances and to issue press releases about ballot measures. The difference between permissible and punishable, according to state statute, is the line between education and advocacy.

Scott said this is something the city understands.

“We’re very aware of the restrictions, and we take them very seriously,” she said.

Page’s preelection communication is not an apples-to-apples comparison to Springfield’s effort, Scott said.

“You have to look at the merits of what the city has produced – does it follow a fact-based, neutral tone and avoid any form of advocacy?” she said. “I would say yes, it does. We’re trying to be helpful to voters but be fully compliant with law.”