The Goldwater Institute is seeking an investigation into one local town and several school districts regarding how they are marketing their election propositions as potentially being illegal.

Those organizations are pushing back saying there is nothing wrong with providing information to the public and that everything they are doing has been legally vetted and in accordance with state law.

The conservative Scottsdale-based organization on Thursday said it sent letters to the town of Gilbert as well as the Gilbert, Queen Creek, Deer Valley and Buckeye Elementary school districts questioning their election information and has asked the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to investigate, according to Joe Setyon, senior communications manager with Goldwater.

“Towns, school districts, and other government entities must follow state law and stop using taxpayer money to advocate for higher taxes, more spending, or any other issue on the ballot,” he said in a release. “Any information about these elections provided by the government must be neutral, unless specifically authorized by law."

The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office confirmed to the Independent it has received the letter from the Goldwater Institute and it is currently under review.

The Deer Valley Unified School District declined to comment on the letter, Director of Communications & Community Engagement Brian Kilgore stated in an Oct. 18 email.

The district has three separate pages on its upcoming bond and override measures.

Goldwater accuses Deer Valley of advocacy on its “Bond and Override Fact Sheet” in the form of vague and subjective statements that the proposed override “Allows Deer Valley to Remain Competitive” and provides “Increased Supports for Students.”

The institute also takes aim at an override frequently asked questions page and its extended argument about “the North Phoenix Population Boom,” citing a “study commissioned for DVUSD in 2022” for its predictions about population growth and consequent “dramatic enrollment changes.”

“Given the context (and FAQ page about a budget override measure), a reasonable reader would understand this language as support for the budget override measure, as it suggests that economic and demographic trends weigh in favor of increasing the district’s budget,” the complaint states.

Town of Gilbert officials say in a statement they fully complied with the law and that state law allows for educating the public.

“State law allows for the use of public resources to educate and inform about ballot measures provided the information does not support or oppose the measure,” the town said in a statement. “Our commitment to maintaining fair and neutral elections is unwavering, and we take great care to ensure that all communications are neutral and impartial and adhere to appropriate legal standards.”

Goldwater’s letter cites two videos posted to social media and mailers sent to residents regarding the city having a permanent base adjustment on the ballot. Such an adjustment would allow the town to reestablish its baseline spending under state law that was last set in 1998.

Another video focused on the benefits of passing Proposition 498, which would exempt a capital projects accumulation fund from the  limit. Goldwater contends there were no arguments against the measure in the video.

Goldwater also accuses the Gilbert Unified School District of electioneering by  promoting its budget override through signs at schools and what it calls “one-sided online messaging” after losing a similar election last year, Setyon said.

“This time, the district is aggressively promoting the budget override continuation through coordinated signage at Gilbert Public Schools locations, one-sided online messaging (including a video that portrays passage in a glowing light and defeat of the measure in a negative light), and even the appearance of ‘Yes’ campaign yard signs in front of some school buildings. Obviously, these actions are neither impartial nor neutral,” he said in the release.

In a statement from the district, officials said all correspondence is reviewed by the Maricopa County Superintendent of Public Instruction’s office as well as the district’s legal counsel.

“All educational entities, including GPS, are able to provide factual information regarding the ballot measure associated with the continuation of the budget override,” the district wrote in a statement. “The majority of information on the website comes directly from the Voter Informational Pamphlet (VIP) which is required by statute. This VIP is carefully reviewed by the County Superintendent’s Office as well as district legal counsel.”

As to the signs at schools, the district confirmed they are on public not school property, officials said.

In Queen Creek, Goldwater objected to several items on the district’s override renewal website, including language in a video titled “What is an Override,” which the institute claims are electioneering slogans and items stating what the district could lose if the override does not pass.

Like both Gilbert entities, Queen Creek district officials say all the information is factual and educational, and all has been looked at by counsel.

“QCUSD is responsible for keeping our community informed by providing factual and accurate information on the override renewal,” wrote Amanda deNight, director of marketing and public relations for the district, in an email. “All information portrayed on our website is 100% factual and has been legally vetted. We aim to inform our residents with factual information so that they can make educated decisions. QCUSD complies fully with all legal requirements, ensuring public trust about all financial matters.”

Richard Smith and Steve Stockmar contributed to this story