Vote No group alleges Liberty principal illegally advocated for bond issue
A campaign ethics complaint calls into question whether Liberty High's principal inappropriately advocated for the Iowa City Community School District's coming bond vote.
The Vote No local ballot issue committee, which opposes the Sept. 12 general obligation bond referendum, said in a complaint that Liberty Principal Scott Kibby violated Iowa law by backing the bond issue in an email to families on June 22.
Martha Hampel, Vote No's treasurer, said the group filed the complaint Saturday.
Megan Tooker, executive director of the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board, confirmed Monday that it was received.
Iowa law prohibits public employees from using public dollars to "expressly advocate the passage or defeat of a ballot issue."
However, the law allows the use of public resources to produce and distribute communications on a ballot issue, as long as someone doesn't "expressly advocate" for it.
The law defines express advocacy as "a communication that uses any word, term, phrase, or symbol that exhorts an individual to vote for or against ... the passage or defeat of a clearly identified ballot issue."
The Vote No group provided a copy of Kibby's email to the Press-Citizen. The email offers parents a list of back-to-school notes, as well as details about the $191.5 bond referendum, which aims to authorize tax-dollar spending on facility projects across the district.
"I can share this information, but I can't tell you how to vote. But I can tell you that I need you to vote on Tuesday, September 12," Kibby said in the email.
The email describes the district's plans to spend bond-issue dollars on new classrooms at Liberty, which opens this fall, and said the addition of outdoor athletics facilities relies on the bond issue's passage.
The email says:
"I want to dispel some rumors I've heard on this. The bond needs to pass for Liberty to get its exterior facilities. There is NO other funding source for the external facilities. We do not have the funding to building (sic) Liberty's stadium (football and track), baseball, softball, tennis or soccer fields without the bond funds. Additionally, the ground to the west of the school where the facilities will go is former farm land and has no infrastructure in it. No water, no power, no sewer (for restrooms). The exterior facilities project costs runs (sic) in the millions of dollars when you consider the infrastructure, seating, storage and the playing surfaces themselves. If the bond fails Liberty will continue to use West High for football, Penn Meadows for baseball, Coralville Youth Sports Park for soccer and softball and we will not have a tennis program. There is a lot in the bond for Liberty, but I want to remind everyone the bond was developed so that there is something in it for all sides of the community. It is a comprehensive program addressing numerous academic facility and athletic facility needs."
The Vote No group, in a news release, argued that Kibby's note exhibits "a very strong attempt to bias his readers" toward supporting the bond issue, includes misleading information and constitutes a public expenditure, because he sent it from his work email address.
The committee opposed Kibby's claim that no other funding source is available for the athletic facilities, noting that other options could become available, such as dollars from a possible extension of the state's Secure an Advanced Vision for Education sales tax.
The group also questioned the district's obligation to fulfill the plans at Liberty as Kibby described them, saying in the release that the facility plans are "subject to change over time."
"The bond issue is of great interest to the community, as it is asking monies for the largest school bond in Iowa history and can have significant impact on the taxpayers of the Iowa City Community School District," the release states.
Kibby, when questioned, referred the Press-Citizen to district spokesperson Kristin Pedersen. She said in a statement that Vote No and the campaign board had not yet contacted the district about the complaint.
"When the complaint is officially received, we will consult with the district’s legal counsel and work with the Iowa Ethics Campaign and Disclosure Board to determine appropriate next steps," she said. "The district’s intent with all general obligation bond communication is to present the facts regarding the passage or failure of the bond, allowing the community to make an informed decision when voting on Sept. 12."
Tooker said the campaign and disclosure board will review the complaint on July 19 to determine next steps, which could include dismissing or investigating the issue.
She said the board has ruled in the past that emails from employee addresses constitute public spending.
Tooker referred to Iowa law when it comes to defining express advocacy, saying public employees can share information about bond referendums but cannot tell residents how to vote.
Reach Holly Hines at hhines2@press-citizen.com or at 319-887-5414 and follow her on Twitter: @HollyJHines.