“Yes for BPS101”, the group that sent out deceptive mailers accusing the anonymously sent “Vote No” mailers of being from “outsiders” and not complying with legal reporting requirements, are themselves funded by outsiders and not in legal compliance! Worse yet, “Yes” was funded by companies working for and with the school district (insiders) who could have profited substantially had the referendum passed. The “Yes” campaign contributions filing statement as of 11/9/22:
DLR Group is a planning/architectural/engineering firm that has been employed by the district since 2019 to put together all the moving parts for this referendum. In this document, you can see how extensively they’ve been involved: Final Report and Recommendations 2022.
Lamp Incorporated is an architectural/construction group. With the money from the 2007, $75 million referendum, Lamp built the additions to the high school that included the BFAC (Batavia Fine Arts Center) and fieldhouse:
Here are people from these 2 companies (circled below) listed as “Participants” in the district’s project planning that set the stage for the referendum:
Also note the highlighted names in that list. Those just happen to be the officers of the “Yes for BPS101” Committee:
So it appears that “Yes for BPS101” is not the concerned group of local citizens they pretended to be.
The last donor on the list, Quest Food Management, is the company that provides lunches in the district’s schools—a sizable contract that just happens to be up for renewal for the next school year:
Lastly, there’s the issue of legal compliance. Committees in the 30 days before an election have 2 business days to report any receipts or expenditures of $1000 or more. “Yes for BPS101” failed to do so. You can see the dates when the contribution were received in the first graphic above. Then take a look at the date stamped by the Board of Elections when the report was received: Nov. 7, the day before the election, many days in violation of state law. Here is their letter of apology to the State, claiming ignorance:
Now, it would be tempting to cut them some slack, because it is possible they didn’t know about the requirements. It is also very possible that whoever sent the “Vote No” mailers, whom the “Yes” people lied about and attacked so viciously, didn’t know about contribution reporting requirements either, or even that they were supposed to create a committee once they received or spent $5000. But the “Yes” people knew enough to create their committee and file it with the state, yet somehow missed all the state’s guidelines on how and when to establish a committee, requirements for reporting and filing, and even penalties for not filing as required. Yes, it’s a bit of reading to do, but it’s well-explained, with lots of examples, and one would think that a Committee pushing for education could take the time to read a few links on the state’s website (screenshot below) and learn what their responsibilities are: