Jeni Dodd, our favorite cosplay patriot, also seems to be one of our most devoted readers. If I make a typo or forget a comma, Jeni is sure to let me know. As What The Funk is a volunteer-based project, it’s great to have a volunteer-editor like Jeni to let me know when I mess up. Today, I want to thank Jeni for pointing out an error I made in a previous article, and the error was certainly bigger than a misspelling. I incorrectly identified Beth Cummings as the latest hire at the elections office. My mistake, and my apologies to Beth Cummings.

I should have identified Beth Cummings as one of the lead plaintiffs in a failed lawsuit attacking the library levy. I’ve updated the article to reflect the correction: https://wtf406.com/2024/02/ecb-hatesphilanthropy/

To understand important context, we have to back up to last year. The library mill levy was on the ballot. Sandra Merchant’s numerous mistakes resulted in the court appointing an election monitor to ensure the election ran smoothly and lawfully. As we previously reported, “volunteers” working in the elections office during the library mill levy were allegedly distributing anti-library materials while volunteering. 

Well, the library levy passed, despite the misinformation campaign propagated by the far-right. Shortly after its passing, a lawsuit was filed attempting to keep the library from implementing those mills. One of the lead plaintiffs in that lawsuit? Beth Cummings. 

Just this week, a judge threw that lawsuit out. Importantly, the judge explicitly states that it appears the plaintiffs (ie Cummings) had no actual legal dispute, were aware of such, and were simply angry about the results.

Read The Electric article here: https://theelectricgf.com/2024/02/28/judge-dismisses-lawsuit-against-city-over-library-election/

The articles states,

“In her order, issued Feb. 27, Perry dismissed the case, writing, ‘although their  filings are detailed and generally well organized, every one of their  legal arguments is wrong. They are consistently mistaken about which  sections of law actually apply to the instant matter, misread and  misapply controlling precedent, and generally find fault where no fault  actually exists or any error was clearly harmless. It is difficult to  read their filings and come away with any impression other than that  this action is a thinly veiled attempt to undo an election result they  dislike rather than a truly justified complaint about a mishandled or  otherwise legally problematic election.”

Huge thank you to Jeni for bringing this mistake to my attention. 

As to Jeni’s other arguments in her piece, we anticipated E City Beat’s lame defense of their story about the library levy campaign. In fact, we addressed it in our own article. As to Jeni’s other assertions about the levy, these claims were already addressed in court, as mentioned above.