Is the 833 Vote Yes Committee Trying to Influence the School Board Campaign, too?

According to MN Statute 211B.01, Subd. 4: Committee. "Committee" means two or more persons acting together or a corporation or association acting to influence the nomination, election or defeat of a candidate or to promote or defeat a ballot question.  Promoting or defeating a ballot question includes efforts to qualify or prevent a proposition from qualifying for placement on the ballot.

The District 833 Vote Yes Levy campaign committee has listed on their 10 Day CFR: "ISD 833 Referendum" as the ballot question they are trying to influence, and yet, on their website, they are making a point to show which school board candidates have come out in favor for or against the levy referendums.  Isn't this the 833 Vote Yes committee attempting to campaign for the candidates that also support the levy referendum?  

While the committee does not directly say, "VOTE FOR CANDIDATE X," listing which school board candidates support or do not support the levy on the Committee for Vote's website, seems to imply that the committee is also trying to influence voters as to which candidates the voters should elect.  If the committee's intent is to also influence voters to elect the candidates supporting the levy, it would seem that the committee should have also disclosed that on their Campaign Finance Reports.  Also, the use of the committee's "sister" website (United for 833) where "candidate profiles" are posted, leads one to believe that it is the committee's intent to influence voters' decisions on which candidates to support.  If the committee is also using their sister site to promote the levy (as it would seem since there is also a promotional article about the levy referendum written by the Vote Yes committee's co-Treasurer, Mary Scholz on the sister site's home page), why hasn't that been noted in the Campaign Finance Reports?  Furthermore, on the united for 833's "About Us" page, the developer, Winnie Williams, states:

"At a recent strategic planning meeting, our superintendent, Dr. Jacobus, outlined a few ground rules for the day before we began.  Some of those ground rules, provide a great framework for how we would like to use this website." 

The Committee for Vote and United for 833 groups tout themselves as independent parent-led groups, but it would seem by this statement contradicts that assertion by the fact that the group was developed during a strategic planning meeting with Dr. Jacobus.  Which makes one wonder about the Vote Yes levy committee seemingly comprised of many of the same people involved with the United for 833 group: how much influence/assistance is the Vote Yes committee receiving from the district administration?    

From the United for 833 website: "As we confirm with others that they are willing to have us place their names on this website, we will include them by name.

Winnie Williams, Alberder Gillespie, Dan Menken, Laura O’Connell, Tori O’Hare, Rich Radke, Eileen Reuss, Jerry Williams, Michelle Witte" 

One may ask, since their names are not listed on the 833 Vote Yes committee's website, how one would know that these folks (bold names) were involved with the Vote Yes committee? (For some answers, please refer to the photos included with this post.) However, doesn't it make one wonder why their names are not included on the Committee for Vote website?  Wouldn't it be nice to see a list of names of the people involved with trying to influence voters to give up more of their hard earned money to the insatiable education machine? It certainly would lend more credibility to the effort.   

Also, according to the 10 Day CFR submitted by the Committee, $2600 was donated to the Vote Yes committee by the "Principals Association" (see the 10 Day CFR).  Why would the Principals' union donate $2600 of their members' dues (money that comes from the SWC 833 principals' paychecks, paid to the principals from money provided to the school district by the taxpayers) to the committee dedicated to influencing the voters to vote yes on the levy referendum?  Did the principals see that the Committee for Vote also seems to be attempting to influence the school board election? Doesn't it seem to be somewhat of a conflict-of-interest for principals to donate to a committee attempting to influence the school board election when it is the school board that negotiates contracts with the principals?  

Kraus-Anderson - the same construction company that built the $90 million East Ridge High School - also donated $2500 to the Committee for Vote. Obviously, Kraus-Anderson is hoping that Q3 passes so they can bid for the construction of the schools on the land that $8 million bond will buy if it passes.  

It would seem that if the Committee for Vote is engaging in attempts to influence the election of certain candidates, the C4V should also report that on their Campaign Finance Report, otherwise, what's the point of the report?