campaign 2017

Why this year’s Denver school board election has become so combative

Voting day 2014 in Denver (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post).

The Denver school board election has grown more contentious in its waning days, with accusations flying about the influence of outside money and attempts to tie candidates who back the district’s agenda to unpopular Republicans.

Although past Denver school board races have been marked by rancor, observers and participants alike agree that the tone this year is different — closer in tenor to the heated 2015 Jeffco school board recall and this year’s divisive Douglas County school board race.

Several factors are at play: the controversial tenure of U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, long-simmering divides within the Democratic party over education policy, a more aggressive teachers union, and the growing influence of outside groups responsible for a torrent of mailers and digital advertising that can prove powerful in low-turnout elections.

At stake is control of a board that is 7-0 lockstep in support of Denver Public Schools’ strategies, which include offering families a choice among different schools including charter schools, rating schools with a system that heavily weights student progress on standardized tests, and closing schools that are persistently low-performing.

Four of the board’s seven seats are in play this election. Opponents of the district’s current path are running for all four seats. Mail ballots went out more than two weeks ago, and voting ends Tuesday on Election Day.

For several years now, school boards have been battlegrounds for factions trying to get a foothold on local politics and influence how public schools run, said Robert Preuhs, an associate professor of political science at Metropolitan State University of Denver.

“Those things continue to play out now and may be more amplified or feel more amplified because of this extra dose of polarization we’ve seen post-2016 election,” he said.

Denver’s school board campaigns have grown more sophisticated and expensive, setting the stage for more combativeness when the conditions are right.

While candidates themselves raise varying amounts of money, independent groups that are prohibited from coordinating with the candidates have emerged as big players. Both teachers unions and supporters of education reform are backing such efforts in Denver.

The biggest money player in Denver is Raising Colorado, an independent expenditure committee. On the scene since 2014, the group is connected to a web of organizations that includes Democrats for Education Reform, a political action committee with a Colorado office.

This election cycle, Raising Colorado has spent more than $350,000 to support maintaining the 7-0 margin on the DPS board, according to the recent campaign filings. The sole contributor to the committee this year: New York-based Education Reform Now Advocacy.

The organization carries out both non-political and political activity. However, as a 501(c)4 tax-exempt social welfare organization that is not a private foundation, Education Reform Now Advocacy is not required to publicly disclose its donors — and it does not. The group has contributed about $2 million to Raising Colorado since its founding.

“It could be $2 million coming from one person,” said Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, which was formed as a counterweight to education reform groups, opposes charter schools and using test scores to evaluate teachers, and is affiliated with a 501(c)4 group that endorses candidates. “You have no idea who is giving to campaigns and what their vested interests might be.”

Robert Speth, a candidate in the Denver at-large race seeking to unseat incumbent Barbara O’Brien, has spoken out about the vast sums coming into the race, which he describes as coming from “out-of-state hedge fund managers.”

“I don’t feel like Denver is actually in control of its political outcomes at this time, and it’s really disturbing,” Speth said.

The privacy veil for donors is in a statutory rule that dates to litigation in the 1950s and 1960s, when a Alabama state investigating committee was seeking names of members of the NAACP, said Marcus Owens, a Washington lawyer and former director of the IRS’s tax exempt division.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that members’ names did not need to be released because of the likelihood of retaliation. Now, 501(c)4 groups at “both ends of the political spectrum make use of that non-disclosure of donors,” Owens said.

Jen Walmer, the registered agent for Raising Colorado and Colorado state director of Democrats for Education Reform, has said the independent expenditure committee and all its affiliates are in full compliance with IRS regulations.

While outside money is not new in Denver school board races, this year has brought more attention to the tone and content of some of the election messaging it’s buying.

Two independent committees bankrolled with money from local and state teachers unions have produced mailers that try to portray supporters of DPS’s current direction as allies of President Donald Trump and Education Secretary DeVos, hugely unpopular figures in Denver.

One candidate targeted in the mailers, Angela Cobián, a former teacher and community organizer and the daughter of Mexican immigrants, assailed the attempt as a baseless attack on her identity, and an editorial in The Denver Post this week denounced the tactics.

The committee responsible for the mailers, called Every Student Succeeds, is supporting Cobián’s opponent, Xóchitl “Sochi” Gaytán.

Gaytán released a statement this week urging limits on contributions to local school board elections, calling the contributions “outrageous.” She said that she “did not approve of any independent expenditure committee literature or mailers,” and that her campaign mailers have focused on her platform. Gaytán has not responded to requests for an interview on the issue.

Here is a similar piece that landed last weekend in northeast Denver, where a three-person race is considered the most competitive and hard-fought among the four contested:

The committees behind the Trump-themed ads share the same political consultant: Steve Welchert, a seasoned Democratic strategist who said he has helmed eight DPS school board candidate campaigns in addition to his independent committee work.

Welchert defended the mailers’ tone and content. “I am comfortable with everything we have done with this campaign and will continue to be comfortable with it moving forward,” he said.

Colorado Education Association and Denver Classroom Teachers Association officials have declined interview requests to discuss the mailers and the recent tenor of the campaign. The committees are funded by union members who choose to contribute to such political efforts.

Candidates being targeted by the mailers and their allies are speaking out forcefully.

School board member and longtime civic leader Happy Haynes, who is not up for reelection this year, said the tactics are “dragging this school board race that should be about our best down into the gutter … The irony is that these are Trump-like tactics if ever there was.”

Rachele Espiritu, an appointed incumbent targeted by the more recent Trump-themed mailer, said she was extremely frustrated by the mailers given her numerous public statements in support of young immigrants and against the Trump and DeVos agenda.

“I’m disappointed these fliers continue to come out against me like this, and that my opponent hasn’t even taken a stance against them,” Espiritu said earlier this week. “To me, her silence is that she is confirming these messages. The negative campaigning takes away from the issues of our students, and that is frustrating to me.”

That opponent is Jennifer Bacon, whose candidacy the committee behind the mailer is supporting. Told of Espiritu’s comments, Bacon said Thursday that she is disappointed by the election’s negativity and that she has focused on running a positive, issues-based campaign.

“I believe people are allowed to have their opinions and voting is an expression of their own positions and research,” she said. “I’m not going to be in a place where I can speak for others and check everything everyone is saying right now.”

Most of Raising Colorado’s mailers have been in support of candidates, including several that have portrayed backers of the district’s agenda as strong voices fighting Trump and DeVos. Campaign finance reports show the group also paid for a mailer in opposition to Bacon.

Espiritu, too, voiced a desire to work on limiting contributions in school board elections. She also said she was excited to get support from different groups and individuals. That includes the backing her candidacy is getting from the Democrats for Education Reform affiliates.

“I don’t think there is really anything for folks to hide,” she said. “I have looked at the DFER website and their values and vision, and I think they are commendable and are things I stand by. Whoever is supporting them, I think they can stand tall knowing they are supporting a great organization that is leading the way to help our students get the best public education they can.”

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to clarify background about the Network for Public Education. 

Follow the money

Final Denver school board campaign finance reports show who brought in the most late money

PHOTO: Denver Post file
Victoria Tisman, 8, left, works with paraprofessional Darlene Ontiveros on her Spanish at Bryant-Webster K-8 school in Denver.

Final campaign finance reports for this year’s hard-fought Denver school board elections are in, and they show a surge of late contributions to Angela Cobián, who was elected to represent southwest Denver and ended up bringing in more money than anyone else in the field.

The reports also showed the continued influence of independent groups seeking to sway the races. Groups that supported candidates who favor Denver Public Schools’ current direction raised and spent far more than groups that backed candidates looking to change things.

No independent group spent more during the election than Raising Colorado, which is affiliated with Democrats for Education Reform. In the week and a half before the Nov. 7 election, it spent $126,985. That included nearly $57,000 to help elect Rachele Espiritu, an incumbent supportive of the district’s direction who lost her seat representing northeast Denver to challenger Jennifer Bacon. Raising Colorado spent $13,765 on mail opposing Bacon in that same period.

Teachers union-funded committees also were active in the campaign.

Individually, Cobián raised more money in the days before the election than the other nine candidates combined. She pulled in $25,335 between Oct. 30 and Dec. 2.

That includes a total of $11,000 from three members of the Walton family that founded Walmart: Jim, Alice and Steuart. The Waltons have over the years invested more than $1 billion in education-related causes, including the creation of charter schools.

Total money raised, spent by candidates
  • Angela Cobián: $123,144, $105,200
    Barbara O’Brien: $117,464, $115,654
    Mike Johnson: $106,536, $103,782
    Rachele Espiritu: $94,195, $87,840
    Jennifer Bacon: $68,967, $67,943
    Carrie A. Olson: $35,470, $35,470
    Robert Speth: $30,635, $31,845
    “Sochi” Gaytan: $28,977, $28,934
    Tay Anderson: $18,766, $16,865
    Julie Bañuelos: $12,962, $16,835

Cobián was supported in her candidacy by donors and groups that favor the district’s brand of education reform, which includes collaborating with charter schools. In the end, Cobián eclipsed board vice president Barbara O’Brien, who had been leading in contributions throughout the campaign, to raise the most money overall: a total of $123,144.

The two candidates vying to represent central-east Denver raised about $5,000 each in the waning days of the campaign. Incumbent Mike Johnson pulled in $5,300, including $5,000 from Colorado billionaire Phil Anschutz. Teacher Carrie A. Olson, who won the seat, raised $4,946 from a host of donors, none of whom gave more than $500 during that time period.

The other candidates raised less than $5,000 each between Oct. 30 and Dec. 2.

O’Brien, who staved off two competitors to retain her seat representing the city at-large, spent the most in that period: $31,225. One of her competitors, Julie Bañuelos, spent the least.

money matters

In election of big spending, winning Aurora candidates spent less but got outside help

Four new board members, Kyla Armstrong-Romero, Marques Ivey, Kevin Cox and Debbie Gerkin after they were sworn in. (Photo courtesy of Aurora Public Schools)

A slate of Aurora school board candidates that won election last month were outspent by some of their rival campaigns — including in the final days of the race — but benefited from big spending by a union-backed independent committee.

Outside groups that backed the winning slate spent more overall during the campaign, but wound down as pro-education reform groups picked up their spending in the last period right before the election. Those efforts were not enough to push their candidates to victory.

According to the last campaign finance reports turned in on Thursday and covering activity from Oct. 26 through Dec. 2, Gail Pough and Miguel Lovato spent the most from their individual contributions.

Together Pough and Lovato spent more than $7,000 on calls, canvassing and consulting fees. Both candidates were supported by reform groups and had been reporting the most individual contributions in previous campaign finance reports.

But it was the slate of candidates endorsed by the teachers union — Kevin Cox, Debbie Gerkin, Kyla Armstrong-Romero and Marques Ivey — that prevailed on election night.

How much did candidates raise, spend?

  • Gail Pough, $12,756.32; $12,328.81
  • Lea Steed, $1,965.00; $1,396.16
  • Kyla Armstrong Romero, $7,418.83; $3,606.12
  • Kevin Cox, $2,785.54; $2,993.07
  • Miguel Lovato, $16,856.00; $16,735.33
  • Jane Barber, $1,510.32; $1,510.32
  • Debbie Gerkin, $4,690.00; $4,516.21
  • Marques Ivey, $5,496.50; $5,638.57
  • Barbara Yamrick, did not file

The slate members spent varying amounts in the last few days before the election. For instance, Cox, who won the most votes, spent $403 while Ivey who recorded the fewest votes of the four winning candidates, spent $2,056.

Most of the slate candidates’ spending went to Facebook ads and consulting fees.

The four also reported large amounts in non-monetary contributions. Collectively, the slate members reported about $76,535 in non-monetary contributions, mostly from union funds, to cover in-kind mail, polling, office space and printing. All four also reported a non-monetary contribution in the form of a robocall from the Arapahoe County Democratic Party.

Other financial support for candidates, through independent expenditure committees, showed that the group Every Student Succeeds which was backed by union dollars and was supporting the union slate, spent less in the last days than the reform groups Raising Colorado and Families First Colorado which were supporting Pough and Lovato.

Overall, the independent expenditure committee groups spent more than $419,000 trying to sway Aurora voters.

Incumbent Barbara Yamrick failed to file any campaign finance reports throughout the campaign.

This story has been updated to include more information about in-kind contributions to the union-backed candidates.