Attorneys for Republican gubernatorial candidates Jack Ciattarelli and Jon Bramnick have told the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission that Townsquare Media’s decision to keep Bill Spadea on the air as the host of New Jersey 101.5’s popular morning drive-time radio show constitutes an illegal campaign contribution and say they fair-market value ought to count against his spending cap.
The panel issued an order to show cause last week and will hold a hearing on Friday to determine whether Spadea’s 20-hour-per-week presence on the radio will affect his ability to receive matching funds under New Jersey’s $2-for-every-$1 gubernatorial public financing law.
Lawyers for Spadea – former RNC Council Charlie Spies and New Jersey election law legend John Carbone – are strongly pushing back, saying ELEC has no jurisdiction because “the radio show is a bona fide news program. It is not broadcast on behalf of any candidate or candidate’s committee; instead, it is broadcast in furtherance of Townsquare’s institutional function to provide the people of New Jersey with news coverage.”
“Something is rotten in Trenton. The establishment power brokers are clearly panicked about the idea of our client—pro-Trump conservative outsider Bill Spadea—cleaning up Trenton,” Spies and Carbone said. “The idea of outsider Bill Spadea restoring power to the people is apparently so threatening that this Board has taken the extraordinary and extralegal action of throwing due process to the side and attempting prior restraint on the livelihood and free speech of newly announced candidate for Governor, Bill Spadea.”
They added, “The attempt here to treat the policy and news discussions of Mr. Spadea’s radio program as an in-kind contribution to his campaign unambiguously violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution and cannot and would not survive judicial scrutiny.”
They maintain that the morning radio show is not an indirect benefit to Spadea’s run for governor.
“What is rotten is the concept that Mr. Spadea should have to—on short notice in a newly created process, and without any complaint or evidence of a campaign finance violation in this Commission’s jurisdiction— ‘show cause’ and defend himself in advance of exercising his right to free speech,” said the two lawyers.
Ciattarelli’s campaign lawyer, Mark Sheridan, placed the value of Spadea’s airtime at roughly $360,000 per week.
“Spadea and Townsquare cannot credibly suggest that allowing Spadea to be on the radio for four hours per day to discuss his opinion on politics and policy issues is not providing his candidacy with a ‘thing of value” or contribution while at the same time, they are charging Ciattarelli for Governor $500 per minute for airtime,” Sheridan maintains.
Sheridan told ELEC that Spadea and the radio station provide “coverage to a single candidate and a single point of view.”
“Mr. Spadea’s dual role as a talk show host and gubernatorial candidate transforms his radio show on NJ101.5 into an in-kind contribution from Townsquare Media. His program offers substantial promotional advantages to his campaign, including unrestricted market access and significant advertising influence typically purchased by other candidates,” said William Burns, an attorney representing Bramnick. “The continuation of Mr. Spadea’s show during his candidacy should be subject to in-kind contribution regulations, irrespective of internal station guidelines.”
In their filing, Townsquare Media said that Spadea will no longer be able to appear on his radio show once he is a “legally qualified candidate.” That means in March 2025, after he submits his nominating petitions to run in the GOP primary.
Angelo Genova, a prominent Democratic election lawyer representing Townsquare Media, maintains that Spadea’s “continued presence on air is part of his longstanding employment.”
“While ELEC’s powers to enforce the Act are broad, they are not without limit,” he stated. “Townsquare does not provide Spadea with airtime as a means for him to promote his candidacy, advocate for the defeat of political opponents, or otherwise conduct campaign-related activities.
Genova maintains that precedents set by ELEC and advisory opinions in other states “makes clear that regular media employment does not equate to campaign contributions when appropriate safeguards are in place.”
“These precedents underscore the necessity of maintaining a clear separation between a candidate’s professional media role and their campaign activities,” Genova said. “They also emphasize the importance of protecting the fundamental principles of free speech and the media’s vital role in a democratic society.”
Spies and Carbone put ELEC on notice that they might be infringing upon Spadea’s First Amendment rights.
“The radio show has not included and will not include express advocacy for or against any candidate for Governor, or even references to Mr. Spadea as a candidate,” they said. “Of course (because it doesn’t exist) there is nothing in the record before the Commission suggesting that the radio show includes any explicit appeal for the election or defeat of any candidate in the Governor’s race. Therefore, the Radio Show cannot be defined as a ‘political communication contribution.”
Spadea’s lawyers say there is no emergent basis for the hearing since no contributions have been reported. They claim ELEC’s authority “does not include prospectively restricting speech that might potentially become a campaign contribution.”
“The procedure that should have been followed here is if Mr. Spadea at some point in the future engaged in campaign advocacy on his radio program, then at that point an investigation and/or enforcement action could be initiated,” stated Spies and Carbone. “If it was then determined that the value of that radio broadcast was in fact an in-kind contribution to his campaign, then the campaign would be obligated to refund the value of such broadcast to the station and/or pay a civil penalty as determined by the commission.”
Sheridan blames Spadea for creating the confusion.
“He could have sought an advisory opinion from this commission as to whether his airtime constituted a ‘contribution’ under the act,” Sheridan said. “Spadea and his employer, Townsquare Media, both failed to avail themselves of that opportunity.”
Genova said an ELEC decision to classify Spadea’s day job as an in-kind contribution “would open the door to excessive regulation of media activities involving any candidate.”
“This could lead to a chilling effect on free speech, where media outlets might refrain from hiring or retaining any individual with political aspirations for fear of regulatory repercussions,” he said. “Candidates who are media professionals would be unfairly disadvantaged, forced to choose between their careers and their political aspirations. Such a policy would also burden media companies with the constant threat of campaign finance violations, stifling their ability to operate freely and independently.”