Can someone explain to me how this effort on behalf of a candidates doesn't endanger the tax-exempt status of this church? Or are they not a 501(c)(3)?
From the Briley campaign this morning:
...Can we count on you to come by and help out with writing some post cards? It is very simple and I promise that it doesn't hurt. We will be meeting tonight (Wednesday) and tomorrow (Thursday) from 5pm to 8pm at Eastwood Christian Church, 1601 Eastland Avenue. And yes, you did hear the rumor to be true... WE ARE PROVIDING CHILD CARE!!
We had such a great response last night that the media actually got word and wants to swing by tonight postcard writing. Again, underlining the grassroots effort that will push David into the run-off Election. If you can, please try to show up.
I thank you greatly for all that you have done up until this point. If you think you can come tonight or tomorrow, simply hit that little reply button at the top of the email and let me know. Thanks again.
Briley for Mayor
I ask because obviously there are churches in town that are unnecessarily restraining the activities of their members and staff because they lack the knowledge that Eastland Christian has on this touchy issue.
This from the Internal Revenue Service:
Political Campaign ActivityIf the press is truly interested in this effort---they might want to broadly publish this loophole so the rest of this "City of Churches" can similarly support candidates.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax.
Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including the presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity.
In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not constitute prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner. On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that: (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention. [Emphasis added]
UPDATE: AC Kleinheider did the legwork (Thanks AC) and discovered:
According to Campaign Manager Emily Passini, the campaign is paying for the space.I'm glad the matter has been cleared up. I should have made the call myself. The campaign might have indicated they'd rented the space in order to ensure there was no misunderstanding. The Justice Sunday and Stand for the Family kerfluffle of last year that had some left leaning folks demanding the revocation of that church's non-profit status despite the fact the had also rented the space should have taught us to be more careful.