Yesterday, I deconstructed one bad reason to vote YES on direct election of Richardson's mayor. In fact, Richardson is not Tammany Hall, but even if you think it is, direct election of the mayor is not the solution.
Today, I look at another bad reason. If you're inclined to vote YES because you think the Richardson City Council favors direct election of the mayor, you just might have been deliberately misled by a political action committee (PAC). After the jump, deconstructing the lie.
If you are like me, you received a robocall from a PAC this week encouraging you to vote YES on direct election of the mayor. I was struck by the wording of the message: something along the lines of "thanks to a unanimous city council action" voters have the ability to vote yes for direct election of the mayor. The implication is that the city council supports the referendum, which is patently false. In February, when the city council considered this option, the city council voted 6-1 against putting this change to the voters. The question is before the voters because of a petition, not because of city council support.
Why can't the PAC behind this petition (whoever they are) simply argue the merits of their case? By deliberately misleading voters about the city council's position, the Vote YES faction takes the low road. If they win, Richardson still won't be Tammany Hall, but we'll have had a little taste of Tammany Hall tactics right here in Richardson. If you are like me, that will leave a bad taste in your mouth.