Support RPS Asked for Public Trust Before Providing Full Transparency
Updated: Aug 28
Why I will not sign its Statement of Support or endorse the PAC at this time
Edited 8/28/2026 @ 1:57pm - I also discovered that Support RPS' website domain was registered June 16, 2026.
After taking time to consider this carefully, review Support RPS’s campaign-finance filing, and examine its public statements and subsequent clarifications, I have decided that I will not sign its Statement of Support or endorse the PAC at this time.
Jenny Steele responded to my questions, which I sincerely appreciate. Her response clarified parts of the organization’s mission, and I also appreciate that Support RPS has continued responding publicly to questions from the community.
I believe Support RPS and I share an important goal: strengthening Rockford Public Schools and ensuring students have the resources, support, and opportunities they need.
My concern is not that Support RPS is political. Political committees exist to influence public decisions, and Support RPS has every right to organize for that purpose.
My concern is that it asked for the public’s names, donations, and trust before clearly explaining the extent of its planned political advocacy and how the organization would operate.
What the Timeline Shows
June 16: Facebook’s Page Transparency history shows that the page was created under the name “Support RPS”, and the organization's website domain was registered that same day.
August 7: According to its Statement of Organization, Support RPS formally became an independent political committee.
August 10: Support RPS filed its Statement of Organization with Kent County.
August 24: Support RPS publicly launched, asked residents to sign a public Statement of Support, and invited donations.
August 25: FOX 17 published a story about the organization. Superintendent Dr. Steve Matthews appeared in the coverage, called Support RPS “a great idea,” and spoke positively about its purpose. Board President Jarrod Folsom also publicly promoted the organization shortly after its announcement.
After community members raised questions: Support RPS acknowledged that criticism of its “no political agenda” description was fair. It explained that it registered as a PAC so it could accept donations and pay for advocacy efforts, including advertisements and yard signs. It also stated that its advocacy would include ballot proposals and candidates.
Creating a Facebook page does not mean the PAC legally existed on June 16. Its campaign-finance filing identifies August 7 as its formal formation date.
However, Facebook’s record establishes that the Support RPS name and public identity had been created more than two months before its August 24 launch. Even with that preparation time, the organization launched without clearly explaining its planned ballot advocacy, candidate support, advertisements, yard signs, candidate-selection process, or potential use of supporters’ names.
Only after community members began asking questions did Support RPS provide a fuller explanation of the types of political activities the PAC was formed to undertake.
That is central to my concern: Support RPS had time to develop its identity and prepare its public message, but it still asked for names, donations, and trust before accurately and completely explaining what the PAC intended to do.
How Support RPS’s Messaging Changed
Initial public messaging | Clarification provided after questions were raised |
Support RPS said it had “no political agenda.” | It acknowledged that it registered as a PAC so it could accept donations and pay for advocacy. |
It presented itself as a parent- and volunteer-led organization supporting RPS and public education. | It explained that its activities could include advertisements, yard signs, ballot advocacy, and support for candidates. |
Residents were asked to sign a Statement of Support based on broad principles. | The organization later provided a fuller explanation of the political activities those supporters could be publicly associated with. |
No candidate-selection process was initially disclosed. | It later said candidates would be evaluated through questionnaires and interviews, but the specific standards and decision-making process were not fully explained. |
Its public-facing description did not clearly identify the full scope of its intended political activity. | That broader scope became clear only after community members asked direct questions. |
These were not minor wording adjustments. They materially changed what residents were being asked to support. There is a meaningful difference between supporting public education in principle and attaching your name—or your money—to a PAC that may advocate for ballot proposals and selected candidates.
“No Political Agenda” Did Not Fully Describe the PAC’s Purpose
My concern is not that Support RPS registered as a PAC. Registration is appropriate given its plans to raise and spend money advocating concerning a ballot proposal and candidates.
My concern is that Support RPS initially presented itself as a positive, parent- and volunteer-led community movement with “no political agenda.”
The organization subsequently explained that it registered as a PAC so it could fund advertisements, yard signs, ballot advocacy, and support for candidates. Based on that explanation, these forms of political advocacy were contemplated when the PAC was created.
I cannot speak to anyone’s private intentions or say why the original language was chosen. I can evaluate whether that initial description fully matched the activities the organization later disclosed. It did not.
I appreciate that Support RPS acknowledged the contradiction, but this was a significant clarification, not a minor wording adjustment. Residents should have received that information before being asked to attach their names publicly to the organization or contribute money.
Transparency provided only after public questioning is not the same as transparency provided before asking people to act. The fact that community questions prompted Support RPS to correct and expand its explanation demonstrates why that scrutiny was necessary.
Its Public Presentation Still Does Not Tell the Whole Story
Support RPS’s Facebook page remains categorized as a “Community Organization.” Its prominent description calls it a “parent- and volunteer-led group supporting our local school district and K-12 public education.”
The page includes a “Paid for by Support RPS” disclaimer, which I acknowledge. However, its primary description still does not plainly tell visitors that it is a PAC planning to spend money on ballot and candidate advocacy.
Support RPS may consider itself both a community organization and a political committee. Those identities are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and I am not alleging that its Facebook category violates any law or Meta rule.
But if transparency is a central commitment, both identities should be equally clear wherever residents are asked to follow, sign, or donate. People should not have to search through comments, campaign-finance filings, or later explanatory posts to understand the political organization they are being asked to support.
Essential Practices Should Have Been Established Before Launch
Before asking residents to sign publicly, donate money, and eventually rely on its candidate recommendations, Support RPS should have clearly explained:
How candidates will be evaluated
Who will make candidate-support decisions
Whether every candidate will have a fair opportunity to participate
How personal political relationships and potential conflicts will be disclosed and addressed
How supporters’ names may be used after candidates are selected
Whether supporters may withdraw their names
What donations will fund
When financial information will become public
Whether the PAC received pre-launch assistance from candidates, current Board members, district administrators, or district-paid consultants
Instead, the organization asked for public and financial support before several of these predictable questions were answered.
The personal political views of Support RPS’s organizers are not the central issue. People involved in a PAC are entitled to support the candidates of their choice.
The relevant question is whether the organization will establish a fair, consistent, and transparent process for turning those personal preferences into official PAC endorsements and expenditures.
That process should be disclosed before residents are asked to lend the organization their names or financial support.
District and Board Leadership
Board President Jarrod Folsom promoted Support RPS shortly after its announcement. Superintendent Dr. Steve Matthews also appeared in FOX 17’s launch coverage and spoke positively about the organization’s purpose.
Their public support does not establish that either person participated in forming or directing the PAC. I have not seen evidence that district resources or district-paid consultants were used.
However, because this is an independent political committee that may become involved in Board races, reasonable transparency about any pre-launch assistance or communication involving candidates, Board members, administrators, or district-paid consultants would help address questions about its independence.
I will not assume that such involvement occurred. Any conclusion should be based on records and evidence.
Supporting Rockford Public Schools Is Not the Same as Endorsing a PAC
A person may strongly support Rockford Public Schools while holding different views about a ballot proposal, individual Board candidates, district decisions, or spending priorities.
Signing a broad statement supporting our schools should not automatically associate someone with candidates or political positions that person did not personally choose.
Before signing, residents deserve to know:
Which candidates the PAC intends to support
How those candidates will be selected
How signers’ names may be presented after those decisions are made
Whether supporters will be notified before their names are associated with candidate advocacy
Whether people may withdraw their names if they disagree with a later endorsement
Supporting our schools and endorsing a political committee are separate decisions.
Financial Transparency Before Voting Begins
Support RPS’s Statement of Organization shows that it did not request the reporting waiver available to committees expecting to receive or spend no more than $1,000.
That means Support RPS will be subject to regular campaign-finance reporting requirements. Combined with its stated plans to purchase advertisements and yard signs and advocate concerning ballot proposals and candidates, this confirms that the organization anticipated more than informal volunteer discussion when it formed.
Support RPS already has a website, branding, graphics, social-media accounts, and a media launch. It has also stated that it plans to purchase advertisements and yard signs.
The public does not yet know:
What the launch materials cost
Who paid for or donated the website, design, branding, and professional services
Whether the committee has incurred unpaid debts or obligations
How much it expects to spend
Who is financing its advocacy
Whether future spending will support particular candidates
Support RPS’s regular pre-general-election campaign-finance report is due October 23—one day before statewide early in-person voting begins and approximately one month after absentee ballots become available.
Other disclosure requirements could apply depending on the committee’s financial activity. Nevertheless, the regular reporting schedule may not provide voters with a complete financial picture until voting is already underway.
That is the legal reporting schedule, and I am not alleging that Support RPS has missed a deadline or violated campaign-finance law.
However, legal compliance is the minimum required disclosure. An organization emphasizing transparency may voluntarily disclose its startup funding, vendors, donated services, anticipated expenditures, and candidate-support process before residents begin voting.
Use Careful Consideration Before Signing or Donating
I encourage residents to review Support RPS’s filing, public statements, planned political activities, and decision-making practices before signing its Statement of Support or making a donation.
Signing is not simply an expression of appreciation for Rockford Public Schools. It publicly attaches a person’s name to a PAC that intends to advocate concerning ballot proposals, purchase advertisements and yard signs, and support candidates through a process that has not yet been fully explained.
Donating provides money that may be used for those political activities.
Before signing or donating, residents should understand:
What positions the PAC intends to take
How it will select candidates
How supporters’ names may be used
Who controls its messages and spending
What relationships exist with district or Board leadership
When its financial activity will be disclosed
Every resident can make their own decision.
My purpose is not to tell anyone what conclusion to reach. It is to encourage people to make an informed decision rather than treating a general statement of support for public schools as if it carries no political meaning.
Asking Questions Is an Expression of Support
Raising concerns, identifying inconsistencies, and asking for transparency do not mean I am against Rockford Public Schools.
Genuine support does not require agreeing with every organization, message, or decision associated with the district. It means caring enough to ask difficult questions, examine the available information, and ensure that we are doing the best we can for our students, schools, and community.
As I have stated throughout my campaign, I intend to remain independent and nonpartisan. I am not running as part of a slate. I want to listen to and work with people across differing viewpoints. I evaluate issues and organizations on their individual merits rather than according to personal relationships or political alliances.
Although I believe Support RPS and I share the goal of strengthening our schools, a shared mission alone is not enough for me to endorse a political committee. I must also have confidence that its messaging, practices, candidate-selection process, finances, and relationships are transparent and fair.
This decision is not about Megan Scanlan, Jenny Steele, or any other organizer personally. It is based on how the organization has presented itself, the information currently available, and the questions that remain unanswered.
This is also not about discrediting an organization simply because I may disagree with it. It is about accountability. Any political committee seeking to influence voters should be prepared to describe its purpose accurately, explain how it operates, and answer reasonable questions before asking the public for its name, money, and trust.
At this time, I do not have that confidence.
What Would Address My Concerns
Support RPS can provide meaningful transparency now by:
Clearly identifying itself as a PAC in its primary website and social-media descriptions.
Publishing its candidate-evaluation and selection process before making endorsements.
Identifying who makes endorsement decisions and explaining how personal political relationships and potential conflicts will be addressed.
Explaining how names collected through its Statement of Support may be used.
Allowing signers to withdraw their names if they disagree with a later political position or endorsement.
Voluntarily identifying its startup funding, vendors, expenses, debts, and donated services before absentee voting begins.
Disclosing any pre-launch assistance or communication involving candidates, current Board members, district administrators, or district-paid consultants.
Support RPS has every right to organize, raise money, advocate for the millage, and support candidates. Community members have an equal right to understand precisely what they are being asked to join.
Based on its incomplete and potentially misleading initial description, its current public-facing presentation, and the remaining questions about its practices, relationships, finances, and candidate-selection process, I will not sign the Support RPS Statement or lend my name and campaign support to the PAC at this time.
I will continue evaluating its actions and disclosures fairly and based on evidence, just as I would with any organization seeking to influence our local election.
Credibility is not created by declaring an organization transparent. It is earned by providing complete information before asking the public for its name, money, and trust.
Public trust is earned through clear answers, transparent processes, and accountability from the beginning. That is the standard I believe our community should expect from anyone seeking to influence its public schools—including candidates, elected officials, and political organizations.
Sources and Supporting Records
Support RPS Statement of Organization - Filed with the Kent County Clerk on August 10, 2026. The filing identifies Support Rockford Public Schools as an independent committee and lists August 7 as its formation date. Support RPS selected “No” on the reporting-waiver request; the form explains that this selection applies when a committee expects to receive or spend more than $1,000 during the calendar year.
Support RPS's website domain proof of registration:
Support RPS Facebook Page Transparency information - Accessed August 25, 2026. Facebook’s history identifies the page as “Created – Support RPS” on June 16, 2026. The page is categorized as a “Community Organization.” Support RPS on Facebook
Support RPS Facebook About section - Accessed August 25, 2026. The page describes Support RPS as a “parent- and volunteer-led group supporting our local school district and K-12 public education.” It also displays its payer identification and states that it is not authorized by a candidate or candidate's committee. Support RPS on Facebook
Support RPS public clarification concerning its political agenda - Published August 25, 2026. In the post, Support RPS acknowledged that describing a political committee as having “no political agenda” was a fair criticism. It stated that it registered as a PAC to accept donations and pay for advocacy efforts such as yard signs and advertisements. The post also stated that its advocacy would include ballot proposals and candidates. A dated screenshot of the complete post is included with this article.
Public comments by Support RPS Treasurer Megan Scanlan - Published August 25, 2026. Scanlan stated that the organization intends to advocate for ballot initiatives and candidates supporting strong public schools. She also identified the November non-homestead millage as its current primary focus and discussed the organization’s intended role in responding to information it considers inaccurate or misleading. Dated screenshots of the complete comments are included with this article.
Support RPS Statement of Support - Accessed August 25, 2026. The statement asks individuals to add their names publicly in support of the organization. It includes the Support RPS payer identification and states that it is not authorized by a candidate or candidate committee and is not affiliated with Rockford Public Schools. A copy is included with this article. Support RPS website
FOX 17: “New community group forms to support Rockford Public Schools”- Published August 25, 2026. The report discusses Support RPS’s formation and its advocacy concerning the non-homestead millage. It includes comments from Support RPS member Rita Proctor and Superintendent Dr. Steve Matthews. Read the FOX 17 report
Public post by Board President Jarrod Folsom - Accessed August 24, 2026. Mr. Folsom publicly promoted Support RPS and directed residents to its website shortly after the organization’s public launch. A dated screenshot of the complete post is included with this article.
Kent County 2026 campaign-finance calendar - The calendar lists October 23, 2026, as the deadline for pre-general-election campaign statements from committees participating in the November 3 election. Kent County campaign-finance deadlines
Michigan Secretary of State 2026 election dates — The state’s election information lists September 24 as the date absentee ballots become available and October 24 through November 1 as the statewide early-voting period for the November 3 general election. Michigan election information
Michigan Secretary of State 2026 election dates - The state’s election information lists September 24 as the date absentee ballots become available and October 24 through November 1 as the statewide early-voting period for the November 3 general election. Michigan election information
Comments