Myrtle’s mistakes Print E-mail
( 0 Votes )
Written by Administrator   
Thursday, 09 January 2014 00:00

myrtle palacio.jpg - 46.09 KbShe deems herself to be in some level a great statistician and numbers guru and an expert on electoral matters but oh who woefully terribly Myrtle Palacio must feel after the Elections and Boundaries department vetted the list of voters the PUP sent in as petitioners to have Elvin Penner recalled from office. 

According to the department, the list was fraught with problems, problems which were not limited to persons signing the petition twice or three times. It has other more glaring problems where in instances where fingerprints were to have been put on as signatures, there was just a smudge. Then there were problems where persons did not even sign the petition, yet the names were sent in. Even worse there was one case where a fingerprint was placed on the petition and when the person on the voter's list was contacted, that person categorically stated that she had not place her thumb print. That seems like fraud to us- but that is a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions to proceed on.

But back to the matter at hand, Myrtle must feel very, very bad because the PUP publicly pronounced that the reason they took so long (8 weeks) to send in the list of signatures was because it was going through some scrutinizing committee. Well that committee was supposedly headed by Myrtle. Lo and behold, after eight weeks of proofing and vetting at Independence Hall the list was submitted and 337 persons were rejected; this despite the fact that Myrtle was once a Chief Elections Officer. She should know what goes into vetting a person to determine if he or she is on the electoral role. By the mere fact that there were so many disqualifications, it would seem that Myrtle does not know her head from her elbow when it comes to the process of vetting.

Last Updated on Thursday, 09 January 2014 15:34