No gain or purpose? Who are you, a SB candidate with something to hide? APS charges for requests and public disclosure is a right by law. Learning more about the people we are electing to run our school division seems very worthwhile to me. |
Anyone catch Walker’s post about the HATCH Act? Boy is she in for a rude awakening when she submits her signed filing statement with ACDC. She will be forced to declare herself specifically as a Democrat and only a Democrat. Seems like that would be inherent in the fact that you are seeking the democratic endorsement to appear on their democratic caucus. Unless she is specifically running as an independent, none of what she said is close to true, and the person that gave her that legal opinion should be reprimanded. For the love of all things good, somebody please get her a copy of the SB rules that went out a couple weeks ago. She should take those rules and explicitly have them reviewed by her legal advisor. This is not going to end nicely (for her or ACDC) if my suspicions are correct about her running for the democratic endorsement. |
She’s definitely advertising the democratic caucus dates. I’ll be the first to file a complaint when she’s signs that dotted line. Her personality is far too abrasive to supervise a new incoming superintendent who will already be drinking from a firehouse. Her reputation is squandered with the current board. There would be zero cohesion meaning zero items get done under her watch. It’s a no for me, and I am ready to sound the alarm. |
I don’t see it. When was it posted? |
From her FB page. I don't know, sounds legit to me:
You may be wondering how I am able to run for school board as a federal employee. As a 20-year career federal attorney who has successfully held a number of critical sensitive positions, I am hard-wired to exercise due diligence in everything I do, including my decision to run for the Arlington school board. Before deciding to enter this race, I sought and received an opinion from my agency's ethics counsel. My participation in Virginia's nonpartisan school board election does not violate the Hatch Act since it requires candidates to appear on the general election ballot as non partisan. Moreover, the Hatch Act Modernization Act of 2012 permits certain federal employees who reside in designated localities to participate in partisan elections and be endorsed by partisan elected officials as independent candidates. I am one of those permitted federal employees, and Arlington is one of those designated localities. Thank you President Obama! I hope this answers any questions about my eligibility to run for school board so that I can continue to focus my efforts on how to best serve our students. That said, I deeply believe that there are very good reasons why School Boards are non-partisan in Virginia. Making sure that our students receive the best possible education and have the opportunities they deserve unites all Arlingtonians, regardless of their personal beliefs or political persuasions. If elected, my door and my mind will be wide open as I’m prepared to stand up for what is right for all our students, exactly as I’ve done in decades of school advocacy. I am proud to be in this race and looking forward to learning how I can be of service to you. |
Candidate filing format. In order to be eligible for endorsement by the participants in the unassembled Caucus, candidates for Arlington County School Board who wish to seek the Democratic endorsement must file a letter of intent with the Chair of the Arlington County Democratic Committee (“Chair”), or his/her designated representative, after January 1, 2020, and before 7:30 p.m. on Monday, March 2, 2020. Each letter of intent (“Filing”) must include: 1) An affirmation that the candidate: a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board; b) is a Democrat; c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in the general election; e) is not a member of any other political party; f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or endorsement process of any other political party for the general election; and g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules. |
From the Hatch Act: Most civilian employees in the executive branch may, however, (1) run for office in a “nonpartisan” election (that is, an election in which none of the candidates represents a political party); (2) run as an “independent” in partisan elections in certain specified, exempt communities in which a number of federal employees reside; and (3) be candidates for and hold positions in political parties and their affiliated organizations. |
So do you think because she has to sign that she is a democrat that she isn’t actually running as an independent? And thus, she’s not within those Hatch Act exemptions? Are you wondering if she showed that ACDC pledge to the ethics counsel? Maybe we should get Obama to call ACDC and tell them to get with the program. My agency’s ethics counsel is as conservative as they come on giving opinions. |
APS charges for FOIA requests |
This is bullshit, plenty of qualified people in Arlington have not run because they are federal employees and know that because of the Hatch Act they can't get the ACDC endorsement in the school board "non-partisan" election, which is required to get elected here. Only one person has won in Arlington without ACDC in the last 20 years, and that was County Board, and he lost re-election to a nobody in a state election year that brought out lots of Democrats (because of the ACDC sample ballot). |
I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No? |
Did you read the part where seeking the ac dc endorsement requires the candidate to declare Democratic Party affiliation. She’s already declared herself a democrat by filing. Seems like she is in violation of the hatch act, unless somehow it’s permissible to run as a democrat for the purposes of the caucus and an independent (as everyone technically does) in the general. It’s a violation of the spirit of the law, but then again, so is the ac dc involvement in a non partisan election a violation of the ideal of keeping partisan politics out of at least one corner of our democracy. |
I just went and looked at OSC advisory opinions planning to prove the naysayers wrong, and assuming there was an advisory opinion that allowed for partisan endorsement in a non-partisan election. Unfortunately, they don't allow this. They allow for partisan elected officials to endorse, but not to seek the endorsement of a party (so her ethics counsel was right- but that's not what she is doing, she is seeking the endorsement of the ACDC.) see osc file no AD-01-0154, Jan 18, 2002- citing Special Counsel v. Campbell, 58 MSPR 170, (1993). This makes me really sad b/c I am actually a Simone supporter, and really would like to see her on the board. |
Simply declaring that you are a Democrat (which is what seeking the endorsement requires) does not violate the Hatch Act, I don't think. I can work for the Federal government and be an active member of the Democratic or Republican party.
While I don't like the endorsement process for these non-partisan elections, the part which I think is indefensible is the requirement that if you seek the endorsement but don't get it, you agree in advance not to run in the general election. This effectively turns the endorsement process into a nomination process, which is entirely antithetical to the idea behind the non-partisan nature of the election. |
Kudos for you for actually looking this up. Looks like I was wrong about the reach of the Hatch Act. |