Who paid for the signs? Questions linger after spate of messaging against school bonds

There's a common thread running through many of the campaign signs, postcards and websites that urged a "no" vote in November's school elections: Who paid for them?

Ongoing complaints with the Maricopa County Elections Office aim to get answers to those questions.

Meanwhile, some election watchdogs worry the complaints will go nowhere because the signs deliberately lack any kind of public disclosure.

Wendy Barnard filed one of the complaints. She wondered why Arizona Taxpayers United, the name listed on signs opposing a Fountain Hills school bond election, was not registered as a political action committee. The county initially closed her case.

“Without any contact information for this group, no action can be taken by us,” the county informed her by letter in early November.

Barnard was exasperated. It’s not fair to let a group get away with flouting required financial disclosure, especially when the “yes” campaign followed the rules, she said.

“Anyone can create a sign with fake credentials,” she said.

That appears to be the case in several of the campaign messages related to the Nov. 7 school elections.

The law requires financial disclosure from any group of two or more people who pay for political advertising if the combined fundraising and expenditures is $1,400 or more. Finances below that amount require all of the contributing individuals to list their names on the political message. The only exception is an individual acting alone.

Education supporters such as Paul Ulan said without accountability, the practice of ignoring disclosure laws will only grow.

“It’s an issue and it’s got to be addressed,” Ulan said. “Next year, they are going to be all over the bond and override elections and school board elections,” he said of opponents.

Ulan, who has worked as a consultant for various school-related election campaigns for years, said this fall’s school elections attracted more opposition than the last 25 years combined.

While he has no problem with vigorous opposition campaigns, he said opponents need to play by the rules.

“You’ve got to have compliance,” he added.

Mystery funders in right-leaning communities

The Republic previously reported on questionable opposition messaging in the Nov. 7 school elections. Since then, other anonymous or untraceable signs, flyers and websites have been identified.

The bond and override issues that failed in the Nov. 7 election were in primarily right-leaning areas where many of these messages proliferated: Mesa, Deer Valley, Gilbert and Queen Creek among them.

For example, a group calling itself No New Taxes AZ was active in north Phoenix, Scottsdale, and Deer Valley with its name on 4-foot by 4-foot campaign signs. In Fountain Hills, the organization was listed as the sponsor of oversize postcards dropped on residents’ driveways — even though the postcards carried what appeared to be postage.

But there is no evidence of a PAC named No New Taxes AZ in county or state campaign finance records.

Also in Fountain Hills, signs opposing the school district’s bond election were sponsored by Arizona Taxpayers United. But as with campaign signs and flyers elsewhere, there is no evidence the group is a registered PAC.

GOP ties to opposition messages?

In several of these cases, the funding is tied to Republican organizations.

For example, three Republican legislative districts sponsored a website opposing the Deer Valley override and bond election. Both issues failed in the Nov. 7 election.

The website, nomoretaxesaz.com, no longer exists. But before it was taken down, a disclosure on the site listed GOP Legislative Districts 2, 27 and 28, as well as the state Republican Party, as the sponsors. The site was copyrighted to 2023 Concerned Voters. There is no formal campaign or PAC with the Concerned Voters name registered with either the state or the county, records show.

LD27, which overlaps with the Deer Valley school district boundaries, submitted its campaign finance report with both the Arizona Secretary of State and the county. But there is no reference to any expenditure for a website related to the Deer Valley school issues.

The district’s treasurer, Susan Elliott, said the report reflects all of the organization’s expenditures. She said she didn’t know about any funding for a website related to the Deer Valley school district.

The Republic in October reported a Republican legislative committee in the Tempe-Chandler area also appeared to fund opposition messages for a bond and override election in the Kyrene Elementary School District. The Kyrene signs were almost identical to ones in central Phoenix’s Osborn Elementary district and in the Gilbert Unified district.

Gilbert resident Kevin Gallagher put his name and phone number on the Gilbert signs and said they were paid for by himself and a group of friends fed up with school taxes. But the phone number is no longer operable, and attempts to contact Gallagher to discuss why he and his friends didn’t register as a PAC were futile.

What now? Some Maricopa County school district bond and override measures failed

iTags for campaign signs

Although county election officials initially said they lacked information to track down Barnard’s complaint about Arizona Taxpayers United’s signs, Fountain Hills Town Councilmember Allen Skillicorn came forward to claim them.

In a filing with the county elections office, he reported he spent $273 on 50 signs bearing the Arizona Taxpayers United name, noting the expenditure was well below the disclosure threshold of $1,400.

He submitted a receipt showing the expenditures were actually made in 2022, when the Fountain Hills school district had another school bond issue.

Skillicorn said he didn't believe he was obliged to put any contact information on the sign. Despite the disclosure suggesting the organization represented "taxpayers," Skillicorn said he was the only one putting money into the signs.

There was no other expense involved, he said, other than the $25 he spent for an airtag that tracked the location of one of the signs.

He said the complaint against him was motivated by "sore losers" who were dismayed the 2023 Fountain Hills school issue failed.

“All I know is the people of Arizona are sick and tired of taxes," Skillicorn said.

'Does anybody really care?'

Trevor Nelson filed a complaint with county election officials, noting there was no registered PAC for a group called parentsforpv.com. The group’s name was on signs opposing a bond election in northeast Phoenix’s Paradise Valley school district.

In his case, county officials located parentsforpv.com for a response to Nelson’s complaint. The group said it is in compliance with all campaign finance laws, although it did not provide any proof and is not registered as a political action committee.

The law exempts individuals who sponsor campaign messaging on their own. But Nelson points to the group’s name – which uses the plural “parents” — and said it’s hard to believe the dozens of signs in the area were the work of just one person.

Nelson has tracked the group's activities and in early October created a PAC with a nearly identical name: Parents for PV. His point was to show up the other group, which he said has failed to file as a political action committee.

How the county handles its investigation will say a lot about the enforcement of campaign laws, Nelson said. He’s skeptical, especially since the county informed him he would have a final reply on his complaint by April 4, five months after the election and long after the signs came down.

”Is there punishment?” he asked. “Is there a fine? Does anybody really care?”

Reach the reporter at maryjo.pitzl@arizonarepublic.com or at 602-228-7566 and follow her on Threads as well as on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter @maryjpitzl.

Support local journalism. Subscribe to azcentral.com today.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Who paid for many signs opposing Arizona school bonds still a mystery