“POOR” or “NOT QUALIFIED”?
by Lonnie Lusardo

If you were a candidate running for office, which rating would seem worse to you: Poor or Not Qualified? The decision may seem academic since either rating is a bleak statement about your readiness to hold public office. For the volunteers doing candidate ratings in the past few years, however, this distinction has caused no end of confusion. Based on a recommendation from the Candidate Evaluation Steering Committee, the board of trustees adopted a solution at their April 2002 meeting: eliminate Poor and retain Not Qualified as the lowest ranking.

The new rating system now in place is Outstanding, Very Good, Good, Adequate, and Not Qualified. This system will be used for the 2002 ratings and we invite your response to the decision.

For more information about the Municipal League candidate evaluation process, refer to the Web site www.munileague.org and click “Candidate Evaluation.” You will see two other references to “Q & A About Candidate Evaluations and Ratings” and “What is the Candidate Evaluation Process?”