About once every election cycle it becomes unfortunately necessary to remind certain elected officials about the rules of their office, specifically, that elected officials are always elected officials.
They cannot pick and choose when they are officials, they cannot take off their hats, they cannot declare themselves “private citizens” and violate their oath of office when it benefits them politically.
When officials are elected, they are required by the state of Arizona to review the guidelines of open meeting laws, public record laws and their oath of office.
Generally, most elected officials understand this, because the rules are very simple: After you are sworn into elected office you are always an elected official. You only cease being an elected official when you resign from office, die in office or your term ends and you are replaced by someone else after an election.
However, the president of the Cottonwood-Oak Creek School District Governing Board, Eric Marcus, believes that he can pick and choose when he is and he is not an elected official.
He recently penned a letter to the public in which he declares, “As Cottonwood-Oak Creek School District Governing Board president …” then falsely announces he is acting as a private citizen when urging voters to vote against consolidation with other school districts, hoisting the blame on COVID-19.
At the end, the piece reminds voters that Marcus is “the president of the Cottonwood-Oak Creek District Governing Board,” end-capping the opinion by twice reminding voters he is not John Doe, but president of the board that will be directly affected if consolidation passes.
Based on the draft language of the merger, if voters pass it, COCSD ceases to exist and Marcus will be out of a job, so it’s clear why Marcus is so eager for voters to reject consolidation.
When we addressed Marcus’ violations of his oath of office, he mistakenly told us that he was told by Yavapai County Superintendent of Schools Tim Carter that he had the ability to remove his elected office temporarily to pen the piece.
We must ask then, when does this take effect? Was it only when he was writing the piece? Does it miraculously take effect every time any person happens to stumble across it? If readers only read excerpted portions, does that mean he is a public official because they skipped his opening falsehoods?
What in Marcus’ mind makes this acceptable befuddles us, because it is simply not true. By his logic, board members could declare themselves private citizens, meet as a quorum and break the law by avoiding open meeting law violations.
When we addressed this point with him and reminded him that he is always an elected official, he claimed he spoke with a lawyer who said it was OK, but did not provide a statement to that effect.
If any lawyer gave him that advice, Marcus might want to find a new lawyer. If Marcus acted as his own lawyer, he has a fool for a client.
Marcus claims that he has a First Amendment right to voice his opinion on any matter and that elected office does not deprive him of that right.
That is true: Every American citizen and visitor to the United States has a First Amendment right to voice whatever opinions they choose.
However, that is not carte blanche. People can still be held responsible for what they say, ergo, someone can libel someone else from a street corner and be held liable for damages in court.
An official can violate their oath of office, and urge voters to save their job, but be recalled by voters or held liable by the courts for those statements. It would certainly be unfortunate if proponents of consolidation read Marcus’ opinion piece, decided to challenge his claim in court and see if any judge in Arizona believes Marcus’ false statement that he is suddenly and miraculously a private citizen because he declares it to be true rather than a public official abusing his office. A judge could determine if Marcus was abusing the powers of his office to promote a ballot measure in violation of state law.
Granted, the state law forbidding elected school officials from promoting or opposing a ballot measure is counterintuitive to their role as elected officials, yet it is the law.
As someone charged with educating our children, it would behoove Marcus and all elected officials who have recently won their elections to not just read the law, but learn it and understand it.
Christopher Fox Graham
Managing Editor
