Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
Norfolk County sheriff spent campaign cash on personal business ventures, state officials say
Sheriff Patrick McDermott has agreed to pay tens of thousands of dollars to resolve the allegations.
Norfolk County Sheriff Patrick McDermott has agreed to pay a hefty civil forfeiture after state regulators determined he unlawfully spent tens of thousands of dollars in campaign funds to further his “personal business future.”
McDermott will pay the state $7,500 in personal funds and nearly $29,000 from his campaign committee as part of the Sept. 10 agreement with the Office of Campaign and Political Finance. He’s also agreed to forgive a $10,000 candidate loan made to his campaign.
OCPF highlighted more than $31,000 in suspect campaign payments made between 2022 and the end of 2024. Regulators alleged some parts of the documentation were incomplete, while others indicated the funds had been used to serve McDermott’s now-defunct real estate holding company or the sheriff himself in his personal capacity.
More local news:
According to the agreement, those expenditures included a “media relations course and consult” and teleprompter software.
Advertisement:
State regulators further alleged McDermott misused campaign funds when he spent $5,650 on a donation and fundraiser for a nonprofit he started. McDermott’s campaign spent another $225 at BJ’s Wholesale Club on food for one of his real estate business meetings, according to OCPF.
McDermott, a Quincy Democrat, promotes himself online as “a coach and mentor to real estate professionals.”
In a lengthy statement included in the agreement, he explained he’s regularly invited to speak to local investment groups and organizations about real estate, and his personal social media accounts “are often used as a hook to attract conversation with these groups.”
Advertisement:
However, McDermott clarified he has never accepted compensation for these speaking engagements — “rather, I saw these as additional opportunities to gain political supporters for future political aspirations.”
He did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday afternoon.
While McDermott was adamant the campaign expenditures were “intended for legitimate political purposes,” he acknowledged they “have reasonably been interpreted as personal or business-related.”
He said his goal had been to “modernize campaign operations” via outreach tools, communication strategies, and volunteer training.
“That said, I fully understand the dual-use implications and accept that some expenditures can reasonably be interpreted as overlapping with professional or personal pursuits and, as such, did not adhere to the strict documentation norms expected under [state law],” he conceded.
McDermott said he would comply with the repayment schedule and civil forfeiture “in the interest of finality and accountability.” He had slightly more than $1,500 cash in his campaign account as of Aug. 31, according to state records.
The sitting president of the Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association, McDermott is now the third local sheriff accused of breaking the law over the past year.
Hampden County Sheriff Nick Cocchi previously admitted to sufficient facts after he was charged with drunk driving last fall. The case was continued without finding, and Cocchi issued a statement accepting responsibility and apologizing for “not living up to the high standards I’ve set for myself, my staff, and the justice-involved population.”
Advertisement:
Last month, Suffolk County Sheriff Steven Tompkins pleaded not guilty to allegations that he used his position to extort a cannabis retailer. He later agreed to “step away” from his position while the case is pending.
McDermott, meanwhile, has not been criminally charged. As part of his disposition agreement, OCPF also said it would not refer McDermott or his campaign to any other government agency, including the Attorney General’s Office.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com