falchuk.JPG

Evan Falchuk, left, shakes hands with State Rep. Shaunna O'Connell as State Rep. Geoff Diehl stands between them. Falchuk joined anti-tax activists in a coalition to advocate for a ballot question barring the use of taxpayer funds for the Boston Olympics.

(SHIRA SCHOENBERG / THE REPUBLICAN)

BOSTON - In a case of strange bedfellows, a former liberal-leaning independent gubernatorial candidate is teaming up with a coalition of anti-tax conservatives to stop tax dollars from being used for the Boston 2024 Olympic bid.

Evan Falchuk, founder of the United Independent Party and an unsuccessful candidate for governor in 2014, is joining with Yes on 1, the group that led a successful effort in 2014 to repeal the automatic indexing of the state's gas tax to inflation. The coalition plans to gather signatures to get a question on the ballot in 2016 that would prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for a 2024 Olympic bid, other than for transportation investments.

"It's going to take a coalition of people who are united on...the important questions, which are will voters be heard? Will taxpayers be protected from the cost of the Olympics?" Falchuk said. "We believe the answer to both of those questions is 'yes.' "

The coalition could be a significant political force. State Rep. Geoff Diehl, R-Whitman, State Rep. Shaunna O'Connell, R-Taunton, Steve Aylward and Marty Lamb, who worked on the "Tank the Gas Tax" effort last year will renew their coalition. The group last year attracted 100 coordinators and more than 1,000 volunteers to campaign for the gas tax question. They were significantly outspent by transportation advocates, construction companies, business and labor groups - $2.7 million to $60,000 - but won 53 percent of the statewide vote.

Falchuk failed in his gubernatorial bid but was successful in getting enough votes - 3.3 percent - to establish the United Independent Party as a political party in Massachusetts.

Falchuk and his party supported indexing the gas tax.

Taylor DiSantis, political director of the United Independent Party and a city council candidate from Pittsfield, said the coalition shows that even people on opposing sides of one issue can come together on another issue.

"We're willing to work with anyone," DiSantis said.

In March, Boston 2024, the group that formed to bring the Olympics to Boston, said it would support a statewide vote, although officials have not yet been specific about the language of their ballot question. No Boston Olympics, a group separate from Falchuk's that was formed to oppose the Olympics, said it would work with Boston 2024 to find ballot question language that both groups could get behind.

Boston 2024 Chief Operating Officer Erin Murphy said in a statement that Boston 2024 does not yet know what language it will seek to put on the ballot. "Boston 2024 is focused on continuing to provide information to the community and elected officials, as well as listening to the suggestions and concerns of the public as the next phase of the bid is shaped," Murphy said. "We are committed to ensuring that a clear, transparent ballot question is put before the voters to consider and believe our bid will be stronger with a majority of citizens of Massachusetts and Boston in support. However, it is still early in the process to know what final referendum language will be on the ballot."

Chris Dempsey, co-chair of No Boston Olympics, said Tuesday that his group has had "surface level conversations" with Boston 2024 about language, and No Boston Olympics will not pursue its own ballot question. Boston 2024 has not yet submitted draft language to the attorney general's office.

Dempsey said his group does not plan to work with Falchuk's coalition, though he welcomes Falchuk's involvement. "We don't have plans for any formal cooperation with them, but we absolutely support the message that they have and the voice they're adding to the debate," Dempsey said.

Falchuk's group is pushing for a ballot question that would be binding and expansive. It would prohibit not only the direct use of taxpayer money and the guarantee of taxpayer money to cover cost overruns, but also the use of taxpayer-backed bonds or other financing guaranteed by tax dollars. It applies only to state tax money, since ballot questions cannot bind municipalities.

"We all know it is a never ending battle to protect taxpayer dollars here in Massachusetts from money grabs and special interests, and that is a battle we here are more than willing to wage," O'Connell said.

Boston 2024 has said it will not ask for state taxpayer money to build venues or operate the games, or for anything other than transportation and infrastructure. But bid documents published by Boston Business Journal and Boston Magazine in May, but not made public by Boston 2024, show that the group considered using tax increment financing to fund land purchases, a mechanism in which future tax dollars from a project are committed to secure financing for the project. Falchuk said the public does not trust Boston 2024.

Leaders of the coalition say their role is to protect taxpayers.

"We trust their plan that they will not use taxpayer dollars, but trust but verify," Lamb said. "We're here to verify they keep their pledge to not use tax dollars of the citizens of Massachusetts to fund the 2024 Olympics."

Both the Massachusetts House and Senate voted down amendments during the budget debate that were nearly identical to the ballot question language. The Senate passed an amendment that said the state cannot spend public money on the Olympics unless the Legislature holds a public hearing and votes on it.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop, Senate President Stan Rosenberg, D-Amherst, and Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, have all said they do not want public money spent on the Olympic bid.

Polling has shown that voters are more likely to support the Olympic bid if no taxpayer money is used.

To get a question on the ballot, organizers must turn the language in to Attorney General Maura Healey's office by Aug. 5. They will have from September to November to gather approximately 65,000 signatures. The Legislature will then have a chance to act on the question. If it does not, organizers will have to collect another 11,000 signatures for the question to appear on the November 2016 ballot.

Falchuk said he thinks the question could do well in Western Massachusetts.

"We hear a lot from people in Western Massachusetts who say we remember the Big Dig," Falchuk said, referring to the Boston construction project plagued by cost overruns and delays. "We remember how money was spent that benefited one region and was spent by people from another region."

This story was updated with a comment from Boston 2024.