The intent of her mailer is crystal clear: it was designed to make voters believe he supports her when he does not. Chief O’Hara is not helping her; she is using him.
A recent campaign mailing from City Council candidate Katie Cashman featuring Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara in full MPD uniform has raised serious legal and ethical concerns. The photo — used in campaign literature sent directly to voters this week — violates clear city and state rules prohibiting the use of police imagery in political materials.
Under Minneapolis Police Department Policy 1-306, “Uniforms in Political Appearances,” police personnel are explicitly prohibited from wearing their uniform in any political context. The rule exists to prevent any appearance that the department or its officers are endorsing political candidates or positions. When a candidate uses such an image to promote their candidacy, the responsibility lies entirely with that candidate.
The Cashman campaign distributed the mailer to households across Minneapolis, pairing the image of Chief O’Hara in uniform with text praising the Minneapolis Police Department. The intent is clear — to imply that the Chief supports Cashman’s campaign and policies. He does not. Chief O’Hara has not endorsed Katie Cashman, nor did she have his permission to use his image or likeness in her campaign materials. In fact, according to sources familiar with the situation, Chief O’Hara was unaware that his photo would be used in the campaign mailing.
That lack of authorization matters. Minnesota Statute §211B.02 makes it unlawful to “knowingly state that an individual supports or endorses a candidate” without that individual’s written consent. The law covers both direct and implied endorsements. By distributing a mailer that uses O’Hara’s image and uniform in a positive political context — without his knowledge or consent — the Cashman campaign appears to have violated state election law.
The issue extends beyond legality to basic ethics. The City’s Ethics Ordinance (§15.110) requires all city officials and candidates to follow city policies and procedures, including those governing the use of city resources and personnel in campaigns. By featuring the city’s police chief in uniform, Cashman disregarded both the spirit and the letter of those rules.
It’s not hard to imagine how serious this could become. What if Chief O’Hara were photographed with former President Donald Trump, and that image was later used in campaign materials suggesting his endorsement of Trump’s policies? The outrage would be immediate and justified. The same principle applies here — Minneapolis cannot have one ethical standard for some candidates and a different one for others.
Chief O’Hara bears no responsibility for this violation. He did not authorize, approve, or knowingly participate in any campaign communication. The accountability rests solely with Katie Cashman, who made the decision to use the Chief’s image in violation of policy and law. The intent of her mailer is crystal clear: it was designed to make voters believe he supports her when he does not.
Voters deserve honesty and respect for the law — not campaign tactics that mislead the public and misuse the trust placed in public institutions. Chief O’Hara is not helping her; she is using him. Minneapolis campaigns must be held to the same ethical standards, regardless of who’s wearing the badge or holding the camera.
I look forward to their being equal outrage for Elizabeth Shaffer sending out multiple fliers with her and the sheriff in uniform since this is clearly something people find important and not something being levied by partisan hacks.
The Minneapolis ordinance is about using “CITY facilities, property, property, funds, personnel, the city logo, the city seal or other city resources, to engage in political activity”. The Hennepin County Sheriff is not city personnel and none of the other prohibited city assets were used by Shaffer. The Sheriff is an elected official and elected officials endorse others and get endorsed.
Sadly, the damage is already done. Her opponent in the election contest would need to put out a mailer citing the statute/ordinance and do it very quickly. There will no doubt be a lawsuit after the election and more money will be spent in the search for justice, rather than helping people who are truly in need!
I don’t think Minneapolis Code 15.110 c is the least bit ambiguous. A “local official, employee or candidate for elective office shall not use city facilities, property, funds, personnel, the city logo (just like the POFM they have blurred the badge), the city seal or other city resources to engage in political activity”.
1) Cashman is a local official and candidate for elective office.
2) O’Hara is without a doubt PERSONNEL.
3) A campaign flyer, sent out by the campaign, is political activity.
I’ve received multiple pro-Frey mailers showing him with Chief O’Hara. To be consistent, you should write an article bashing Frey for this.
None of those flyers were prepared by Jacob Frey’s campaign… and thus not subject to the same legal standard. Frey not responsible for what independent groups do.
It would be nice if David Brauer would accurately quote what I wrote in his Bluesky blogs on this topic. Just because you’re a retired journalist doesn’t mean you surrender your journalistic integrity.
Actually, Katie is misleading voters by running a photo posing with the police chief. Her record proves she has voted against police time and again. So WHY is Katie doing this? Because she’s desperate–like so many socialists who now see their efforts to defund the police have backfired in this campaign. Could this be so because in Ward 7 there’s a sea of Elizabeth Shaffer signs to a couple Cashman signs? A legitimate councilmember would stand by their votes and explain why they oppose more police, rather than imply they are pro-police.
Well said
She’s a menace to this neighborhood and city.
Marjorie, could you please point me to the votes that you think are against the police “time and time again”. My memory is that she voted for the increased budget for police so I’m not sure where this is coming from and would be genuinely interested what you are referring to?
The difference is that Sheriff DeWitt has endorsed Shaffer, and the Sheriff is not a city employee.
Steve, do you happen to know what Marjorie is talking about when she says Cashman has voted against police time and time again? I genuinely don’t know what votes are being referred to and would love some clarification but Marjorie won’t give it.
There is no statement in the literature that O’Hara endorses or supports Cashman, which is what you need to break the law cited. Further the policies you cite do not prohibit CMs from showing pictures of themselves with uniformed cops. You can criticize the ethics of the photo but your claim it is illegal is false and misleading.
A lawyerly argument. Maybe you will get to represent her in front of the Campaign Finance and Disclosure Board. However, the intent and application ARE violations of the law as there could be no other implication based on the caption language below the picture. Good luck