Durango School District 9-R settles campaign contribution lawsuit for $500 dollars

Durango School District 9-R settled a lawsuit for $500 dollars that Colorado Attorney General Philip Weiser filed on behalf of the Elections Division of the Secretary of State over an illegal campaign contribution.

Public Information Officer Karla Sluis. Image borrowed for fair use and news purposes from the Durango School District 9R website.

The lawsuit started after a Durango resident complained of an illegal election campaign contribution from Durango School District 9-R towards one of its school board members, Katie Stewart.

Of relevance, this story below details a response from the district’s Public Information Officer to my questions about the contribution to Stewart’s campaign.

The problem of electoral advocacy arose after Katie Stewart–a member of the Durango School District 9-R Board of Education–had announced her candidacy for the General Assembly in House District 59.

Earlier this year, questions arose about whether Stewart was capable of serving on both the General Assembly and the school district at the same time. Also in question is the legality of serving both positions at the same time.

However, it was in January 2024 when the Durango School District 9-R used public time and resources to draft a letter on behalf of Katie Stewart, a candidate for the Colorado General Assembly, according to the Complaint.

Specifically, the illegal campaign contribution is further articulated in Claim One of Colorado Attorney General Philip Weiser’s Complaint for the Electoral Division:

“That letter was then posted to the District’s website and distributed to the District’s email newsletters to both district parents and employees.”

“The purpose of the letter was to assuage growing concerns amongst the electorate that Stewart was unable to serve effectively both on the school board and in the General Assembly.”

“By attempting to assuage this concern, the District—a political subdivision—provided a thing of value to Stewart for the purpose of promoting her election to the General Assembly.”

“The Division is entitled to relief under Article XXVIII of the Colorado Constitution and the Fair Campaign Practices Act, § 1-45-101 et seq.”

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser’s Complaint revealed how Durango School District 9-R Public Information Officer Karla Sluis used ChatGPT to generate an artificial intelligence (AI) blurb for Board Member Katie Stewart.

The Complaint raises the question as to what extent Public Information Officer Karla Sluis relies on ChatGPT to write press releases for the District News web page.

Here’s what I asked Karla Sluis:

The school district’s Public Information Officer Karla Sluis responded to my questions about this case, stating as follows:

Hello Mr. Howell,

Here are answers to your questions regarding the Secretary of State complaint:

I do not use AI tools to do the majority of my writing. However, I find AI to be a time-saving resource for the volume of work required in a two-person communication department. We cover the district administration, Board of Education, and 11 schools across 1,000 square miles of La Plata County, as well as crisis communication. I do on rare occasions use AI tools to create a template for content that is intended to be refined, such as a letter or a quote. For those who are not familiar with using AI prompts to generate content, this is similar to creating a “first draft.” According to my colleagues at the National School Public Relations Association, this is common practice for many professionals across the country.

Our settlement with the Colorado Secretary of State included the following:

·  The story was removed from the website.

·  A clarification was published in district newsletters in early February.

·  The PIO reimbursed the district out of her own pocket for 60 minutes of work in producing the content.

·  The district paid $500 to the Secretary of State office in early March.

·  The penalty was reduced from $1,000 because of substantial and timely cooperation with the Division.

My intention as Public Information Officer was not to “show favoritism,” endorse a candidate, provide an in-kind donation of time, or disseminate electioneering communication. My goals for this communication regarding Ms. Stewart were the following:

·  Be proactive in my communication efforts.

·  Provide information regarding the legality of Ms. Stewart’s potential dual roles.

·  Help our staff and school families be informed of Ms. Stewart’s decision.

I believe our staff and school families have a right to know about information that affects the district.

Here is the Settlement Agreement: