Like other referendums we see around the state, taxpayers in D214 are being sold a massive referendum by paid campaign operators with money from vendors looking to make big profits from the construction.
Based on available evidence and past history, it is highly likely that teachers’ unions and contractors are/will be funding a $50,000 campaign for a referendum “yes” vote in a way that hides this fact until it’s too late.
If you are a voter in District 214, you will likely get a postcard in the mail telling you to vote “yes” on the D214 referendum, or maybe half a dozen of them, or a similar number of texts.
People should read the mailers carefully and read between the lines of the slick language prepared by companies like EO Sullivan and Core Strategies, which are hired to prepare the “campaign” mailers and send them to a targeted voter list. Those mailers most likely won’t tell the whole story – most importantly, the total cost of the referendum. With interest costs for the bonds, that $295 million referendum is likely costing taxpayers $350 million.
The most important question, though, is who is funding them?
The short answer is this: a PAC named Vote Yes for All District 214 Schools.
Their disclosures are available at the Illinois Board of Elections website.
They report a Chair and a Treasurer on their D-1 Statement of Organization, and a starting balance of $5,000. Their official PAC email is yes@yes214.com — and there is a website, yes214.com. The D-1 form has the hallmarks of being DocuSign-ed, and the treasurer uses a P.O. Box.
But who is funding this group? Where did the initial $5,000 come from to open the PAC? State law doesn’t require the source of funding to be disclosed for the first $5,000.
And if history is any guide, $50,000 or more could be spent on this referendum, funded not by parents but by unions, vendors, and contractors.
This is what happened in District 23 in 2025, with a PAC chaired by State Senate candidate Carina Santa Maria. And this is what happened in District 21 in 2018 – with a PAC helmed by Kelly Eidson, now the chair of the 214 PAC.
Already, we know that in addition to the initial $5,000 in the PAC, two subsequent donations, each in the amount of exactly $10,379.14, were made by two contractors. Those companies are Ameresco (builds public infrastructure) and McKinstry Essention, a woke construction company with an entire Equity and Inclusion section on their website.
What happened in District 23 is what is likely happening in D214.
District 23, the elementary school district that covers Prospect Heights as well as parts of Arlington Heights and other towns, has been trying to get a referendum passed since 2023.
In 2023, the PAC Citizens in Support of District 23 Referendum received $10,550, including $5,000 from Arcon Associates (an architectural firm specializing in schools) and $5,000 from Nicholas & Associates (a general contractor).
In 2024, the PAC Citizens Support of District 23 Referendum (note there’s no “in” in the name) received two contributions of $5,000 each from Papa Nicholas, according to the handwritten paperwork. It’s more likely that this is again from Nicholas & Associates, which has over the years contributed over $100,000 to referenda and election campaigns. The PAC that year appears to be truly parent-run, with significant errors in disclosure, not just failing to provide the address for their donor but also failing to file the A-1 at the time of receipt as required, but only after the election was over and failing to file a Q2 report at all.
2025 is where the dealings get truly shady, potentially illegal, and very much against the intention of campaign finance disclosure law.
In 2025, the PAC was called Yes to Meet the State’s Mandate and Improve. Note that the name itself doesn’t reference District 23, making it hard to find the disclosures.
Its treasurer was Bethany Brinkworth and its chair was Carina Santa Maria (in the disclosure as “Maria, Carina Santa”). Recall that at the same time as this campaign was occurring, Santa Maria was running for Arlington Heights village trustee, and was constantly posting on social media about that election, but never about the referendum.
Ultimately the campaign spent about $50,000, on costs such as mailers, yard signs, etc., with virtually everything paid to Cor Strategies, for costs identified as “mailers,” “yard signs,” “web design,” and so forth but the single largest expenditure being $20,000 for “consulting.” The only exceptions: $958.90 to Amazon on 4/1/2025, $409.72 to Jimmy Johns on 4/2/2025 (the election was April 1st), and $750 to This Way to Fabulous (Santa Maria’s graphic designer/web designer/branding consultant) on 2/14/2025.
The pass-through expenditure bills were paid on April 11. The consulting bill was paid on 6/30/2025.
And the contributions:
The Citizens Support of District 23 Referendum transferred their remaining funds, and the PAC disclosed $5,000 in starter contributions (state law doesn’t require the source of funding to be disclosed for the first $5,000).
An A-1 was filed on April 1, 2025, the day of the election, with contributions by major vendors/contractors. Another A-1 was filed on 6/16/2025, well after the election, with a contribution by the teacher’s union for $20,000 — just in time to pay the consultant’s bill.
In other words, at the time of the election, no one would have been able to go onto the website and see who was paying for the mailers or the texts or the website, because Cor Strategies effectively loaned the PAC the whole of the $50,000 by agreeing not to bill them until after the election.
It also seems more likely to me than not, knowing that Santa Maria signed her name as chair but was heavily visible promoting her own campaign, that the entirety of the work was done by Cor Strategies – that the community members did no more than sign their names on the PAC paperwork. It seems likely that Cor Strategies chased up the big-dollar contributors, created the website, designed the mailers, all in the name of “consulting.”
Another Example – What Happened in District 21
This election took place in November 2018, with a PAC chaired by Kelly Eidson, now the chair of the D214 PAC, District 21 Vote Yes to Secure Our Children’s Future. This PAC took in a few contributions from (apparently) private citizens, and again more contributions from vendors/contractors, and a total of $24,000 from the teachers’ union. Again, they spent about $50,000, of which $15,000 was paid to Cor Strategies for consulting. At the end of 2024, they had a debt of $1,624 owed to Cor Strategies, for which the teachers union made a contribution in precisely the amount necessary to repay that debt.
The EO Sullivan/Cor Strategies connection
In a person, Collin Corbett, an employee at EO Sullivan, the consulting firm “advising” school boards on referenda, and the founder of Cor Strategies. (Corbett is running for Illinois Governor as an Independent and has, laughingly, called for property tax reform after working directly to raise property taxes. )
More specifically, in the June 25, 2026 board meeting presentation by EO Sullivan discussing potential referenda levels (minutes here, livestream recording here, about the 1:35 mark), presenter Ed Sullivan simply says, “there will be a parent group that will run a political committee.” Not, “often parents step up to run a committee.” But “there will be.”
And indeed in prior elections and prior presentations, Sullivan has been more explicit. In Glen Ellyn District 41, on August 15, 2022, Sullivan gave a similar presentation and said the following about the 2:30 mark):
We have a two-company strategy. We, EO Sullivan, is contracted by the school district to run a community engagement to run a community engagement process. When you guys have voted, and you just voted to, in the affirmative to move forward with a ballot question, there is a political company that will take over the campaign side of it once there is a group of individuals that are identified, we will meet with them, they will hire what’s called Cor Strategies, which is a political company, that will run the actual referendum.
So, this whole time frame that we’ve been doing this community engagement process, some of you have met Collin Corbett, he is the owner of Cor Strategies, so he works for me in essence, so you have a seamless process, if you will, but for transparency, the public can see that the school district paid EO Sullivan and then obviously never paid Cor Strategies, and then the campaign committee will hire Cor Strategies. They will file a report with the state board of elections, on any expenditures or income greater than $5,000 that triggers a report, and I would assume that would happen and so all expenditures at the end of this campaign —
Where are we in the cycle right now? So we are in the third quarter, there will be a report if they have any expenditures and there will be a fourth quarter report that will take place in January. They’ll probably have the bulk of the expenditures or/and income so there will be legal documents, reports that will highlight all that but that is individuals, volunteers that will — and they don’t have to hire Cor Strategies quite frankly, I mean it’s really — you guys are out of it, from the political standpoint, quite frankly, sometimes that might be a little alarming, but I think that you’re going to entrust some individuals that have a reason to actually move this forward that will want to do that, and we will give them a budget, we will show them, and it’ll be a campaign run no different than if you’re running a gubernatorial campaign, it’ll be the same quality.
Q: So it’s really guidance and financial accountability that gets offered?
A: Right, so this campaign committee, this PAC, if you will, they’ll have to form a PAC, there will be two members, one will be the president, one will be the treasurer, they will have all aspect of what goes on. There’ll be about four or five steering committee members that will make the day-to-day decisions, we will write out a budget, we’ll see how much money we have, and then anything that gets spent, we send these folks an email and say, do you guys, this is your decision, do you want to move forward with this or not, once they say yes, we help them with that, we help them raise money, we help all aspects of that, as of what was on the political campaign side.
The bottom line: campaigns to get bond referendums passed are not grass roots campaigns. Either Cor Strategies or the school district identifies (“entrusts”) people who will agree to be the names on the PAC, but Cor Strategies does the work.
And notice how often Sullivan says “we” — Cor Strategies and EO Sullivan may be legally separate entities, but they don’t view themselves as different in practice.
And look at the text on the yes214.com website:
The families of D214 have developed a community-driven plan that makes the most pressing improvements needed at all schools.
In the upcoming November 3rd election, we have the chance to protect one of our community’s most valuable assets: our schools. District 214 has earned our trust for more than half a century, delivering world-class education while managing our tax dollars responsibly. Now the buildings that house that education need critical improvements. This is our moment to act.
We worked towards this solution so it can be done at a reduced cost that families and residents can afford.
The “families of D214” have not done this. A select few “inner circle” individuals were selected to be on committees. The school board cast a vote after reviewing polling data and staff presentations. And notice that last sentence: “We worked towards this solution so it can be done at a reduced cost that families and residents can afford.” Who is the “we”? No one is willing to put their names behind this website.
Before you make your decision, ask yourself this:
Do the people making these claims have in mind the best interests of students and taxpayers? Or the desires of the unions and the contractors?
SIDE NOTE: Sullivan and Corbett also teamed up to pass the D200 Wheaton Warrenville School District $151 million referendum in 2024. Read more: CUSD 200 Face Opposition Over $151 M Referendum. EO Sullivan was paid at least $72,500 from the school district. Core Strategies was paid $18,811.98 for consulting and other campaign materials and support. The payment came AFTER the election.