While there might not be much general excitement about the election in Fort Wayne, there has been some excitement about the race for city clerk. Yes, I typed that the race for city clerk has been exciting. This is the office that is responsible for maintaining the municipal code, keeping the records of the city council, and keeping the city seal. It also oversees parking control which would seem to be a good place to look for excitement, but that is not where you will find it.
The excitement is stemming from accusations that members of the office have been engaging in electioneering. Specifically, the clerk who was elected in 1983 and her chief deputy, who was running to replace the retiring clerk, have been accused of inappropriate activities and have resigned their positions over the accusations.
The News-Sentinel broke the story. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions about the investigation and video.
I want to ask a more general question. Anyone who has been around elected officials knows that there are discussions of politics campaigns, and elections. When is the line crossed into electioneering and/or misuse of government resources?
Sometimes the line is easy to see.
Using government equipment for campaign purposes, accessing official government databases for campaign purposes, and soliciting and accepting campaign contributions in the office clearly are visible lines that should not be crossed.
Sometimes the line is not as clear.
When a candidate is in a government office talking about his most recent mailer or commercial, is he trying to persuade a voter or just talking shop with politically involved and informed people?
If employees are eating lunch in a government office break room and they are talking about going out after work to put up yard signs or work a phone bank, is that a misuse of government space and equipment?
In the end, campaigns are going to find their way into government offices, so who is responsible for stopping it or reporting it? Obviously, any elected official who is involved in this should be held responsible. Should the people who serve at the pleasure of the elected official be held responsible? There is a pretty good chance they should be? How about other elected officials? Should they be held responsible for activities that take place in the offices of other elected officials? It might be politically advantageous to say that another elected official is responsible, but that might not be realistic. How about someone who works in the office, but does not serve at the pleasure of the elected official? The challenge here is to be sure that there are mechanisms in place that allow them to file complaints without fear of retribution.
Don’t forget to vote on Tuesday 11/3 if you haven’t voted already.
