Is Our Civil Process a Democracy or Is It a Cabal?
How does non-profit fundraising for public purposes change our democratic system?
There is a recent article in the Register titled BEC gets schematics review, addresses rumor mill, in which AOS 98 Superintendent Robert Kahler is taken aback by the suggestion that anyone would question the motives of donors of the 40-80 million dollar school that has been a perpetual spotlight feature in The Boothbay Register since July 2021 when it was announced in a press release that community members raised $2.5 million dollars at a luncheon conducted by Paul Coulombe and Steve Malcom.
It is reasonable to place the luncheon at Paul Coulombe’s golf club, the same setting Coulombe used to negotiate pay-to-play deals when he was in the liquor industry, dealings that required Coulombe to pay a two million dollars fine and a promise never to engage in the liquor industry again.
The Camoin Report that the JECD purchased with 79000.00 of taxpayer money did not suggest a new school system. That idea was first introduced by Paul Coulombe, the man who would be king.
The money raised at the luncheon would be used to pay architects to design a plan for the school in advance of the public referendum to determine if the public wants a new school system potentially scheduled almost two years down the road in May of 2023. A perfect time frame, all things considered…..continue reading on.
The school board is nervous about the uncertainty of public approval for the project. Had a public referendum occurred at the outset, the vote would be either for or against moving ahead with the project. If the public voted against the project, there would be no cause to be nervous about time money, and energy not invested. If the public voted to go ahead with the project there would be no cause to be nervous about winning the public’s approval for the project, it would just be a matter of deciding on what plan is best, which would be far less stressful.
Financing and engaging in an all-consuming architectural design prior to public approval of the purpose serves as a very expensive advertising campaign for an outcome of a referendum. It is usual in a decision involving a large expenditure of money and transformational changes, to consider other options. Not doing so feels manipulative because it is. The public is told how important their approval or involvement in the process is, except when it isn’t and so it ceases to be a decision that is only about a school and becomes a decision about who runs our community and how they run it. It is a defining moment in the civic process of our community, raising the question, Is the process for sale?
In the following quote, a local resident asks the architect about rumors of donor wheeling and dealing, and Superintendent Robert Kahler jumps in and answers before the architect can say a word:
Boothbay Harbor resident Tom Perkins asked Britton (Lavallee Brensinger architect) to address rumors potential donors are asking for the project design to meet certain goals before they make any contributions. Perkins said the idea is not helpful to the BEC preparing a plan for voters and that total transparency is important. AOS 98 Superintendent Robert Kahler picked up on the question and said the BEC is in the early stages of fundraising and that there have only been a few general conversations around donations.
Kahler and other board members said this was the first they had heard of such rumors and that the BEC has been doing its best to be transparent by putting all of its information on the school website and discussing items in meetings. “I certainly haven't had those conversations nor have I had that experience throughout this whole process. It's been quite the contrary: 'What do you need?'.”
Kahler said he is working to help people access what has become a “very large amount of information” by creating videos explaining all the steps taken so far, decisions the BEC has made, what the CSD committee and board of trustees have reviewed and the timeline. Videos will be geared toward voters and donors by giving the most information as briefly as possible, he said.
“If you hear something and you say, 'Well that doesn't sound right,' call and ask … I have no idea where those messages are coming from and I don't try to even chase them down because there's not enough time in the day … As we get more actively involved in fundraising, people can certainly expect more updates.” (emphasis by author) BEC gets schematics review, addresses rumor mill
When Khaler says all of its information, he means information about the design process, obscuring the question about donor negotiations. It’s his job to focus on the visualization of the school as an appeal to the targeted voter outcome and potential donors, though I am not sure how that became his job, that is on a need-to-know basis, I guess.
When Khaler says there have only been a few general conversations around donations, it begs the question, is that a yes? One conversation is all it takes.
When Khaler says: “I certainly haven't had those conversations nor have I had that experience throughout this whole process.” he is obfuscating to whom the question was addressed, it was addressed to Mr. Britton.
I have been asking about the identity of donors who paid the architects but Mr. Kahler never acknowledges my question leaving me to speculate that Mr. Kahler and others signed a legal agreement that requires them to conceal the identity of the donors. The IRS website states that With the exception of private foundations, an exempt organization is not required to disclose the name and address of any contributor to the organization. However, the public does not even know the organization to which the contribution was made and whether it is a foundation or not.
It is Mr.Kahler’s job to focus on the design presentation, and not extraneous considerations because there's not enough time in the day for anything other than designing the new school.
Keep your focus on your job, don’t look up, don’t look down, and for heaven’s sake don’t look all around!
The only donation venue on the AOS website is Boothbay Region Education Foundation. The latest filing found for the foundation is for the year 2020 while the funds for the architects were not raised until 2021. Under Checklist of Required Schedules it is stated #2 Is the organization required to complete Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors. It is checked yes. There are other questions that would be revelatory if they were publicly available, such as #6 Did the organization maintain any donor-advised funds or any similar funds or accounts for which donors have the right to provide advice on the distribution or investment of amounts in such funds or accounts? If "Yes," complete Schedule D, Part I
However, there is no publicly available information to suggest that donations raised by “community members” was made through the Boothbay Region Education Foundation. There is no mention of the funding of the architects along with other donations in the BREF Board Meeting Minutes after the funds were raised. The missing mention suggests that the funds were not donated through the Boothbay Region Education Foundation. Perhaps the Boothbay Education Foundation was bypassed because it is a foundation, requiring that it identify the donors.
I have often wondered why it is that so many non-profits latest 990 reports are two years old. As it turns out, if they do not file a 990 report for three years, they lose their non-profit status, but if they are late within that window, there are large fines to be paid. An organization will only be allowed an extension of 6 months for a return for a tax year. that reduces the penalty fees for filing late. It is so consistently done that it must be intentional.
Form 990 is due on the 15th day of the 5th month following the end of the organization's taxable year. The potential vote on the school will also take place in May. Is it a coincidence or is it perfectly planned?
The fundraising was organized by Paul Coulombe and Steve Malcome, two names frequently found together and associated with the Boothbay Region Development Corporation, a murky non-profit about which no information is to be found other than what is published in the Boothbay Register.
The Boothbay Region Development Corporation is developing a “priority zone” as it is called in LD 2003. Erin Cooperrider is its vice president and primary spokesperson. Erin Cooperrider is also a primary architect of LD 2003. It is commonplace in a government-run as public-private relationships for industrial leaders to draft the laws that serve their industry. Erin Cooperider is also a principal in New Heights Group development corporation that is developing another priority zone in Rockport, Maine.
Why shouldn’t we trust these folks to engage in similar varieties of pay-to-play as they always have already established, on the record? Should we believe that AOS 98 Superintendent Robert Kahler and other board members do not know that Mr. Coulombe had to sell his distillery to avoid jail time for pay-to-play? Isn’t it the same concern as in the rumors? Giving, Mr. Kahler the benefit of the doubt, Mr. Coulombe has done a stellar job of keeping that information out of the mainstream media.
This process is a teaching moment. We teach, by example, to future generations, the way that the civil process works. It’s still playing out. It’s up to the public now.
While "these 'TIMES' they are a-changing", the long arc of history curving toward, rather than away from, the natural human liberalism of Love over Money can't be denied.
However, we better listen to this advice of "Strategic Advantage” [Michael Porter HBS] which is worth much more than the vast wasteland of political contributions.
Hopefully, assurances and thoughts reflected in these double-sided demonstration signs, which have evolved over years of social political-economic thinking — may enhance our evolution:
LOVE
OVER
VIOLENT
EMPIRE
and on the other side:
LOVE OVER
POWER, MONEY
HATE & EMPIRE
I continually do ad-hoc focus-group testing in Maine and New Hampshire (with 90%+ favorable), and have just printed these newest double-sided Campaign-signs for our November Mid-Term Election:
SOCIALIZING
CREATES
LOVE
and on the other side:
CAPITALISM
ENFORCES
EMPIRE
All of which leads to the confidence — that the first Party to 'Choose' violence, will 'Lose’.
YES, they picked the wrong duck at the carnival.