Deciphering the chatter
There has been a lot of back-and-forth about what happened to the money contributed to the now-failed SB 277 Referendum. Amid a huge backlash of disillusionment, possibly true accusations of pharma infiltration of the campaign, the integrity of various individuals being called into question, it’s really more drama than you would expect from a telenovela marathon over a 3-day weekend.
Some people have been looking beneath the surface. Notably again, California activist Andrew Liebich, who is quite skilled at using the California Secretary of State’s Cal-Access website, has been sharing recently-filed reports via social media. The Cal-Access site provides easy access to public campaign records. A skill your average activist, or others with concerns would do well to learn for themselves. Find the FPPC ID of that campaign that has captivated your curiosity and give it a try sometime. Just plug that ID into the search box and click away.
Every campaign for election, referendum, recall or political initiative is required to file financials on a quarterly basis, via California Form 460. Yesterday was the deadline for the 460 to be filed on the SB 277 Referendum, and the information gleaned from this filing is used as the basis of reporting in this post.
Among the cacophony of noise surrounding the referendum have been rumblings about people who have donated to the referendum via GoFundMe receiving emails asking for some seemingly intimate private information. Information like their name, address, occupation and employer. This freaks some people out. I would advise against replying to any such email, it could just as easily be identity thieves or pharma operatives, as it is to be the Campaign Treasurer, Tim Donnelly. That said, if you have donated to the referendum and did not provide this information (because GoFundMe didn’t prompt you for it), you are required by law to provide that information, if you donated more than $25. You may want to contact Donnelly yourself via the email provided on the 460. I’m not posting the email here because you shouldn’t even trust this post. Read the 460 for yourself.
Are people getting refunds?
There have been some posts on various California Activist Facebook Groups where people have claimed they have been receiving refunds. Some have viewed these claims with skepticism, while others are optimistic. But what is the truth? A read of the 460 filing on January 29th reveals, YES some refunds have been issued. As we can see on Page 4 of the original filing, two persons received refunds of $100.00 each.
Upon inspection of Amendment 1 of the filing, we can see another refund in the amount of $100.
It would seem any rumblings about abuse of campaign funds are without merit as this document proves the campaign is issuing refunds.
Update: the campaign is issuing refunds, however, this video by Liebich illustrates how promises to use the funds for one purpose were later changed and funds were used for other purposes.
Are you seeking a refund?
I can’t speak on behalf of the SB 277 Referendum Committee, as I am not associated with it. What I can say is, you can find the contact information for the committee on the 460 forms linked in the Citations section below. You could seek a refund. If you are so inclined, you could donate your refund to one of these vaccine education campaigns, which are playing an essential role in this war against medical mandates: Learn The Risk (Billboards/web) or Stop Mandatory Vaccination (TV/web). There is a simple fact of reality, the campaign has had expenses: petition collectors, consultants, transaction processing fees, travel, lodging, etc., so if everyone demanded a refund the campaign would go bankrupt. You may want to consider asking for a partial refund that takes the expenses into account. Or maybe not. It is highly unlikely that every donor will ask for a refund.
- Committee for SB277 Referendum Recipient Committee Campaign Statement (F460), Original, filed 01-29-2016
- Committee for SB277 Referendum Recipient Committee Campaign Statement (F460), Amendment 1, filed 01-29-2016