General Politics Discussion

[ijmorlan]

So while it is easy to beat up on a city staffer because they sent an email, let me give you some perspective....

I used to work with someone who was the one in charge of the election.  That person is PERSONALLY responsible for the election under the Act.  They are open to lawsuits, etc. IN ADDITION to the city.  So they can choose to ignore The Museum (which I agree was a creative marketing ploy that really stood to do zero harm to the election), however, if a candidate who lost decided to sue the Chief Elections Officer for failure to ensure that the Act was complied with, his/her life would be complicated in ways I wouldn't want to deal with.  Much easier to send a cease and desist letter.  The current holder of the job (Christine Tarling) is a city solicitor, so I don't blame her one bit for covering her "legal" butt.

Coke

Good comment. I would add that often people just assume that they can do whatever, when in fact there are long-standing rules governing how things have to be done. This is especially true around important procedures like elections. The Museum should have checked on the legality of their proposed promotion before beginning it. They are a big enough organization that they can be expected to do some due diligence; they aren’t a kid’s lemonade stand.