Globe station questions Eastlick's appointment

Courtesy of KQSS Radio
Gila 101.9 FM
gila1019.com

For years, Dixie Mundy ran the Gila County Elections Department, and did a great job. When she retired, Gila County Supervisor Shirley Dawson decided her secretary, Linda Eastlick, should be the new elections director.

Reports are that Supervisor Dawson did not consider anyone else; her mind was made up that Eastlick was going to be the new elections director regardless of who had more experience or seniority.

David Rogers had been with the county elections department since 1995, and he had been Mundy's right hand man for many years. Rogers had the experience to take over the position, but he was not even considered.

Eastlick was given the job despite having no election experience, no county government experience, and while she is very nice, she had no elections experience.

She took her certification where she learned the basics and who to call for help. Mundy was hired back as a consultant at $26 an hour to help her learn the job.

The county has also contracted William Doyle with Elections Operations Services to do much of the election director's job through 2012. The county will pay $225,000 for his services, performing the same duties listed in the job description for the election director, a position that pays $51,000 a year.

This means one consultant was hired to teach Eastlick the job, and now another is being paid a quarter million dollars to do the job.

One citizen asked how Dawson could place her friend in the job, even though she was not qualified for it. This citizen explained that Mundy never hired consultants; she did her own work and did a good job of it.

David Rogers could have stepped right into the position without any problems or additional expense to the taxpayer. Despite having more than enough experience to do the job, and the fact that he had been with the county 12 years longer than Eastlick, Rogers was not offered the position and currently makes $40,000 a year; that’s $11,000 a year less than Eastlick.

This mean that if the Supervisors had acted fairly and appointed the most experienced employee with the most seniority as the elections director they could have saved the taxpayers a quarter of a million dollars in just over a year.