What Districts May and May Not Say About Their Own Bonds and Levies

Every school bond and levy campaign in Idaho has two sets of speakers. One is the district itself: the board, the superintendent, the business office, the spokesperson, the website, the newsletter that goes home in backpacks. The other is everyone else: parents, teachers on their own time, taxpayer groups, booster clubs, contractors, neighbors. Idaho law treats them very differently. The district is a public body spending public money, and the Legislature decided in 2018 that public money should not pay to persuade voters. Private speakers are free to persuade, and the law asks them only to say who is paying and to report their money.

Course 46 covers the general rule for every Idaho public body in Ballot Measures and Issue Campaigns and applies it to schools, teachers, students and parent groups in Schools, Churches and Religious Organizations. This lesson goes further into the school district case: the exact words of the statutes, the channels districts actually use, what the enforcement record shows, and step-by-step guides for a resident who thinks a district crossed the line and for a district that wants to inform voters without crossing it. The cost math for the ballot statement is in lesson 07 for bonds and lesson 05 for levies.

The rule, in the statute's own words

The Public Integrity in Elections Act is Idaho Code 74-601 through 74-606. It was added in 2018 and amended in 2021, 2022 and 2024. Its statement of intent, in 74-602, is one sentence: the Legislature finds it "against the public policy" of Idaho for public funds, resources or property to be used to advocate for or against a candidate or ballot measure.

The working rule is in 74-604. Unless a law specifically requires it, a public entity and its employees may not make an expenditure from public funds to advocate for or against a candidate or ballot measure, and a public official may not make or authorize one. The second subsection does the same for public property and resources. The third bars offering college extra credit at a state college or university to influence a student's vote, which does not reach K-12 districts. The 2024 amendment carved out sitting legislators who use public resources for correspondence about an initiative or referendum. That exception does not help a school board.

Everything turns on four definitions in 74-603.

Term	What 74-603 says	What it means for a school district
Public entity	The state, agencies, counties, cities, school districts, state colleges and universities, and other taxing districts that can put measures before voters	Every Idaho school district is covered by name. A public charter school is not named; ask the county prosecutor before assuming either way.
Public official	An elected or appointed member with authority to set policy, supervise personnel or approve spending	Trustees, and in practice the superintendent and business manager
Advocate	To campaign for or against a candidate or the outcome of a ballot measure. Not "providing factual information about a ballot measure and the public entity's reason for the ballot measure stated in a factually neutral manner"	The district may explain why it put the measure on the ballot, if it does so neutrally
Factual information	Includes but is not limited to the cost of indebtedness, intended purpose, condition of property to be addressed, date and location of election, and other information needed for transparency	Enrollment counts, building ages, repair estimates, the bond amount and the election date are all fair game
Ballot measure	Constitutional amendments, bond measures and levy measures	Every school bond, supplemental levy and plant facilities levy
Property or resources	Goods, services, equipment, software and hardware, extra credit, intangible property or facilities provided for a campaign. Public resources available to the general public, on the same terms, are exempt.	District email lists, printers, paid staff hours, the website, social accounts and the gym when it is not open to everyone on equal terms

Read the definition of "advocate" twice. It protects not only bare facts but also "the public entity's reason for the ballot measure," so long as both are stated in a factually neutral manner. A district can say the board put a bond on the ballot because the 1958 elementary has a failing boiler and enrollment exceeds design capacity by 140 students. What it cannot do is tell people how to vote, or dress the facts in words chosen to make people feel a yes vote is the only decent choice. Where that line sits on a given flyer is the whole fight, and the statute leaves it to prosecutors and courts.

Why Idaho drew the line here

The case for the rule is simple. Taxpayers on both sides fund the district. When the district spends their money to persuade, a voter who opposes the bond is paying for the other side's campaign. Districts also hold advantages no private group has: the parent email list, the backpack, the school marquee, the trust that comes with being the school. The Legislature's finding in 74-602 treats that as a matter of fairness between voters.

The case for giving districts room is also real. Voters cannot judge a bond without facts, and the district is the only party that has them: the facility study, the engineer's report, the enrollment projection, the bond counsel's estimates. School leaders have argued that the line between information and advocacy is too vague, so they spend money on legal advice just to explain a measure. In October 2023, three statewide education organizations representing trustees, administrators and school public information officers backed Idaho Falls in its case, saying its materials were informational, according to Idaho Education News. People who oppose bonds answer that the safe course is plain: numbers, no adjectives, and let a private committee make the pitch.

The Legislature also pushed districts toward more speech of one kind. Since July 1, 2021, Idaho Code 34-913 and 34-914 have required specific cost figures on bond and levy ballots and in district communications. Section 74-605(7) says publishing those required disclosures is never a violation. So the law forbids persuasion and requires arithmetic.

What a district may say, and what it must say

The exclusions in 74-605 list what the Act does not stop. For a school district the important ones are:

• Neutral get-out-the-vote messages (74-605(2)). "Election Day is May 19. Find your polling place at voteidaho.gov" is fine.
• An objective statement of purpose and effect (74-605(5)), including for bonds and levies the cost per taxpayer or per taxable value, based on reasonable estimates prepared in good faith.
• Required notices and disclosures (74-605(7)), naming 34-913, 34-914 and 34-1406, the county clerk's notice of election.
• Balanced classroom discussion or debate of current or pending election issues (74-605(8)).
• Personal speech by officials and employees (74-605(1) and (3)), covered below.

The required disclosures are the part districts most often get wrong, because they reach far past the ballot. For a bond, 34-913(5) says any mass communication "sent by a taxing district to twenty (20) or more voters," in any medium, and "any media presented by a taxing district for public viewing, including posters, websites, or social media," must include the information in subsection (1)(b) through (g). For a levy, 34-914(4) requires (1)(b) and (c).

Must appear in every district communication about a	Items
Bond (34-913(1)(b) to (g))	Anticipated interest rate (and any maximum on the ballot); total to be repaid, shown as principal, interest and the sum; estimated average annual cost as "A tax of $___ per $100,000 of taxable assessed value, per year, based on current conditions"; payoff period in months or years; total existing district debt including accrued interest; and, if the statement mentions a guaranteed dollar amount of state tax relief money that expires, the year it is guaranteed through
Levy (34-914(1)(b) and (c))	Estimated average annual cost per $100,000 of taxable assessed value, including whether the tax per $100,000 is expected to stay the same or change and by how much, and the length of time the levy will be assessed

The penalty for skipping them is severe. Under 34-913(6) and 34-914(5), if a court finds the district failed to comply, it "must declare the outcome of the ballot question invalid" and award costs and fees to the winner. A contest has to be filed within 40 days after the canvass under 34-2001A, which lists failure to comply with 34-913 or 34-914 as a ground. We found no reported Idaho decision voiding a school bond or levy for a missing disclosure in a flyer or post, as of October 2026. The statute's wording leaves a judge no discretion once a violation is found.

The channels districts use, one at a time

The Act does not name email, Facebook or backpack flyers. It names expenditures, property and resources, and 34-913 and 34-914 name websites, social media and posters. Applied together, they reach every channel a district controls.

Channel	Allowed	Not allowed	Statute
District website and social accounts	Neutral facts, the official statement, election date and polling places, recorded public presentations	"Vote yes" graphics, shared posts from a campaign committee, testimonials urging a vote; any bond or levy post missing the cost items	74-604(2), 34-913(5), 34-914(4)
Parent email and text lists	Neutral fact sheets with the required figures	Persuasion, or giving the list to a committee	74-603(5), 74-604(2)
Flyers sent home with students	Neutral fact sheets with the required figures	Committee flyers or "vote yes" material using district distribution; asking students to carry a campaign message	74-604(2), 34-913(5)
Classrooms	Balanced discussion or debate of the measure	A teacher urging students or their parents to support or oppose it	74-605(8), 74-604
Staff meetings	Neutral briefing on the measure; reminder to vote	Urging staff to campaign or vote a certain way, especially at a mandatory meeting on district time	74-604, Twin Falls letter (2026)
Consultants paid with public money	Facility studies, cost estimates, polling on facts, neutral communication help	Campaign strategy for a yes vote or organizing a supporters' committee	74-604(1)
Buildings and rooms	Rental or use by any group on the district's usual terms, open to all sides	Free or special access for one side	74-603(5)

Backpack flyers and consultants deserve a closer look. Backpack flyers go to parents, who are voters, so a district fact sheet sent that way is a mass communication under 34-913(5) when it reaches 20 or more of them, and it needs the cost items. A parent group or committee flyer that rides home in district backpacks uses district distribution, which course 46 lesson 12 explains is likely a public resource unless the channel is truly open to every community group on the same terms. We found no Idaho ruling or official guidance on backpack mail specifically.

Consultants are the other. In March 2019, the Lemhi County Sheriff's office began looking into complaints that Salmon School District had used public money to promote a $25.6 million bond, which drew 58 percent support and failed. The complaint, filed by a policy analyst with the Idaho Freedom Foundation, pointed to contracts with a facilities consultant, including a July 2018 contract with a $9,000 consulting fee, a fee reduction if the measure failed, and a plan for the consultant to organize an "ad hoc" citizens committee and present bond election strategies, according to Idaho Education News. The county prosecutor recused, and the complaints went to the Jefferson County prosecutor. We did not find a public report of charges in that matter. A 2024 report by the Idaho Statesman and ProPublica said the Freedom Foundation and similar groups had publicly accused at least four Idaho districts of improper bond or levy advocacy, and that prosecutors pursued fines only in Idaho Falls.

Trustees and employees on their own time

Section 74-605(1) protects any official or employee "speaking, campaigning, contributing personal money or otherwise exercising" individual First Amendment rights, as long as no public funds pay for it. Section 74-605(3) says an elected official or employee may personally campaign for or against a ballot measure if no public funds, property or resources support it. Course 46 lesson 12 adds the federal cases on teacher speech.

The practical test is the four questions a prosecutor would ask: whose time, whose money, whose equipment, and whose audience. A trustee who writes a letter to the editor at home, signs it with her name and adds her title for identification only is fine. A trustee who sends the same letter from her district email account to the staff list is not. A teacher who knocks doors on Saturday for the bond committee is fine. A teacher who hands the committee's flyer to students at dismissal is not.

The Twin Falls matter shows that the setting can turn a general message into advocacy. On January 5, 2026, the chair of the Twin Falls School District board spoke at a staff meeting he had requested, held on school property, made mandatory for educators, with breakfast at district expense. He urged staff to vote in the May primary, said "quite a few" legislators do not support public education, and cited two 2024 legislative primaries decided by 782 and 1,247 votes. He named no one. Four Twin Falls legislators facing primary challengers complained to the Attorney General. In an April 23, 2026 letter, a deputy attorney general found a violation of the Act and asked the chair to cease and desist, warning that a future violation would bring a request for a civil penalty and attorney fees. The letter said the key question was not whether he named a candidate but whether the presentation as a whole advocated for or against one, and it noted that a teachers union campaign's talking points closely resembled the remarks, according to Idaho Education News. The chair declined to comment to the paper.

That case was about candidates, but the reasoning carries straight over to bonds and levies. A trustee at a mandatory staff meeting who never says "vote yes" on the levy, but spends ten minutes on how much the schools would lose if it failed and when the polls open, is in the same position. Former Attorney General Jim Jones disputed the letter's reasoning in a May 2026 column on Idaho Education News, arguing that the Act does not apply when no specific candidate is backed or opposed; that is his view, and no court has ruled on the letter. The reports we read do not explain how the matter came to the Attorney General rather than the county prosecutor, whom 74-606(4) names for local agencies.

Who enforces, and what happens

Under 74-606, the penalties fall on individual officials and employees, not on the district:

Violation	Maximum civil penalty
Conducting or participating in a violation	$250
Knowing violation	$1,500
Knowing violation within 12 months of a prior knowing violation that was admitted or determined	$2,500

The Attorney General enforces the Act for state agencies. County prosecutors enforce it for local agencies, including school districts. If the county prosecutor is disqualified, the statute says the prosecutor or the county commission shall seek a special prosecutor under 31-2603. The penalties are civil, so there is no jail and no criminal record. The bigger costs are elsewhere: legal fees, staff time, and a news cycle about the district's conduct in place of the measure.

The disclosure laws work on a different track. A resident who is an elector of the district can file an election contest within 40 days of the canvass, naming the district as defendant, under 34-2001A. If the court finds the district skipped the 34-913 or 34-914 requirements, the result is void. So a district that runs a careful neutral campaign but forgets the interest rate on its Facebook graphic is exposed to a remedy far larger than any fine.

Idaho Falls School District 91, 2022 to 2023

The largest Idaho enforcement case so far began with a $250 million bond on the November 2022 ballot. It drew about 58 percent support and failed. The district had paid for posters, postcards and bookmarks. One bookmark read "Our students need modern, safe, and secure schools," and another "We need to address growth and crowding in schools." On May 18, 2023, Bonneville County Prosecutor Randy Neal filed civil complaints against the former superintendent and the district's spokesperson, arguing that words like "need," "aged" and "overcrowding" turned information into advocacy, and wrote that leaders used the wording against their lawyers' advice. He sought fines totaling $375. The district fought. In December 2023 the parties settled: the complaint against the spokesperson was dismissed, the former superintendent's $250 fine was paid with money that was not the district's, and no one admitted wrongdoing, Idaho Education News reported.

The cost figures depend on who counted. Idaho Education News reported district records showing nearly $90,000 in legal fees from July through October 2023. The 2024 Statesman and ProPublica report put the cost of the fight at $54,000. The two numbers may cover different periods or matters; district invoices, available by public records request, would settle it. Either way, the fees ran hundreds of times the fine. The prosecutor said the case "has sent quite a shockwave through the districts," and predicted districts would choose words more carefully or use private donations for promotional material. The superintendent who took over said the complaints were an attempt to block the district from sharing basic facts. A spokesperson for the taxpayer group that opposed the bond called the settlement "a small win."

A separate 2023 Idaho Falls fight is often confused with this one. Voters approved a 10-year, $33 million plant facilities levy for a new elementary school in May 2023 with nearly 70 percent. The State Tax Commission refused it in August 2023, ruling that a district may have only one plant facilities levy at a time, and the Attorney General agreed in Opinion 23-2. On November 17, 2023, a Fourth District judge set the levy aside as illegal, finding also that it did not meet the statutory disclosure requirements to count as an amendment of the district's existing levy, according to the Attorney General's office. That case was about levy law rather than speech. It shows the disclosure statutes have teeth in court. Lesson 06 covers the plant facilities rules.

Private committees: the people who can say "vote yes" or "vote no"

Everything a district cannot say, a private committee can. That is the design. The committee pays with its own money and reports it. Under 67-6602, any person or group "specifically designated to support or oppose" a measure is a political committee at any dollar amount. A group that is not designated for one measure becomes a committee once it takes in and spends more than $1,000 in a year to support or oppose candidates or measures.

Local measures get a reporting break. Under 67-6608, the treasurer of a committee designated to support or oppose a local ballot measure files no reports until it receives or spends $500. Within seven calendar days of crossing $500, it files a cumulative report back to the first dollar, and from then on it follows the regular schedule in 67-6607 whatever the amounts. A general-purpose committee that dabbles in a local measure gets a $1,000 threshold on the same terms. Course 46 lesson 07 walks through the reporting calendar, the itemizing threshold and the 48-hour notices.

Paid communications that expressly advocate approval or defeat of a measure must say who is responsible for them, under 67-6614A. The 34-913 cost disclosures bind the taxing district, not the committee, but a committee whose numbers do not match the ballot invites a credibility problem the other side will be glad to point out. Opposition committees work under the same rules. A taxpayer group fighting a bond registers, names a treasurer, reports, and puts its name on its mailers, exactly like the supporters.

If you think a district crossed the line

Complaints work best when they are specific, documented and fair. Prosecutors see vague complaints during every campaign, and the ones that went somewhere in Idaho came with the actual materials, their distribution and their cost. Course 46 lesson 11, Complaints, Enforcement and Pitfalls, covers complaint mechanics in general.

Some residents use these tools mostly to slow a campaign they oppose; some districts treat every complaint as harassment. Neither instinct helps voters. The statute gives both sides a workable standard: facts and required numbers from the district, persuasion from private committees with their names on it.