uring the recent mayoral campaign, Mayor Heather Fargo violated the “non-interference” clause of the Sacramento City Charter when she went around City Manager Ray Kerridge and tried to get Sacramento Police Chief Rick Braziel to reopen a closed and unfounded case in order to smear her political opponent.

Section 62 of the Sacramento City Charter states that the City Council and its members shall deal solely and directly through the city manager to conduct investigations as provided in Section 34 of this charter, or to contact officers and employees of the city for the purpose of inquiry or obtaining information that is a public record. (Big oops on Mayor Fargo’s part).

But defying the city charter was not enough; Fargo’s contact with Chief Braziel could be a violation of the 1939 Hatch Act.

The Hatch Act outlaws federal employees from participating in partisan political activity; directly, the act prohibits the “use [of] official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the results of an election or nomination.” A 1940 amendment to the act extended coverage to state and local employees whose salaries include any federal funds.

The mayor’s campaign says the mayor is exempt from the Hatch Act. However, it is very clear that Mayor Fargo is covered by the Hatch Act; her primary job duties are in connection with programs that are financed, in whole or in part, by federal loans or grants. As the mayor of Sacramento, which receives a great deal of federal funding, she is consequently subject to the Hatch Act, regardless of what the prevaricators and tricksters in her campaign say.

The penalty for violating the Hatch Act is removal from one’s position and the loss of funds appropriated for the position. If the violation does not warrant removal, a penalty of not less than 30 days suspension without pay shall be imposed.

In Fargo’s case, she is just arrogant enough to think that Sacramento citizens are dumb enough to forget her egregious violation. She is wrong.

History in Context
Seeking electoral reform, the government, under the leadership of President Thomas Jefferson, restricted the political activities of federal employees in the name of effective government. A new order was issued, proclaiming that while it is “the right of any officer [federal employee] to give his vote at elections as a qualified citizen… it is expected that he will not attempt to influence the votes of others nor take part in the business of electioneering, that being deemed Columbia and certain employees of state and local governments.”

One does not have to be a constitutional lawyer to understand the intent of the earliest restrictions on civil servants or of the Hatch Act. Fargo did not accidentally break the law. She willfully set out to destroy Kevin Johnson’s chances of a fair race for mayor—as flagrant an action as it was willful.
As we witness today’s politics of not substance but smear and slander, the corrupt political machine is indeed sitting right in our city hall. Mayor Fargo’s actions were unethical. The coercive use of her office is a possible Hatch Act violation—especially when reflecting on the nature of the office and the spirit of the law.

Mayor Fargo and several of her City Council cohorts have forgotten (or never cared) that they are supposed to oversee the “impartial execution of the laws,” according to the Supreme Court. For the wanton abuse of her position, Mayor Fargo should be stripped of her office and any remuneration. She should be forced to leave in shame; however, I doubt that shame is anything she is capable of feeling.