| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Big changes to recall process after right-to-work vote enrage Michigan Democrats
David Eggert | deggert1@mlive.com By David Eggert | deggert1@mlive.com
on December 14, 2012 at 2:30 AM, updated December 14, 2012 at 10:23 AM
LANSING - Legislative Republicans early Friday approved big changes to the state's procedures for recalling elected officials, drawing withering criticism from Democrats who alleged it was an act of self-preservation in the wake of the passage of a right-to-work law earlier this week.
The legislation, approved 22-16 by the Senate around 9:30 p.m. Thursday, has a combined effect of making it more difficult to recall lawmakers, the governor and local officials, Democrats said. The GOP-controlled House, which approved an earlier version of the legislation last week, agreed with the changes on a 65-40 vote after 2 a.m. Friday.
One significant change would shorten the time to collect recall signatures from 90 to 60 days. Officials subject to recalls would have opponents instead of the existing system under which recall elections are an up-or-down vote.
The opponent would be selected in a primary election before the recall election - which Democrats said would delay the process. Recall petitions could not be filed against officials with two-year terms in the first six months or last six months of the term.
Those serving a longer term - such as state senators, who serve four years - could not face petitions in the first or last year of the term.
"Why are you making it more difficult to recall an officeholder?" said Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer, D-East Lansing, days after the GOP quickly finalized a bill prohibiting unions from requiring workers to pay dues or fees as a condition of employment. "We are willing to work on this with you. Yet you jam it through in dark of night on the last night of a lame-duck session. ... You're trying to inoculate yourselves from a recall."
But Amber McCann, spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, said the intent of the legislation is to cut down on "political gamesmanship," citing a flurry of recall attempts in 2011 that she said wasted time and taxpayers' money. That is when unions and Democrats opposed to the agenda of Gov. Rick Snyder and GOP lawmakers tried to respond with recalls.
In one instance, they successfully led a recall of Rep. Paul Scott, R-Grand Blanc, for his role in a new law weakening the role of teacher tenure in Michigan and his votes to cut education funding. Critics of recalls say officials should not be subject to recall for votes or policy decisions, but instead only for official misconduct.
At least as initially introduced in late November, the recall legislation had bipartisan support from some lawmakers. A bulk of the hundreds of recalls in the state each year are at the local level and involve mayors, supervisors and other local officials.
In the Senate, 21 Republicans and one Democrat voted for the bills. Eleven Democrats and five Republicans voted against them.
The bills also would:
• require county election boards to determine whether the reasons for recalls are stated both "factually and clearly." County boards now look for "sufficient clarity" only.
• limit recall elections to May and November of each year.
• prevent elected officials from facing no more than one recall during their term of office.
Email David Eggert at deggert1@mlive.com and follow him on Twitter @DavidEggert00 |
|
|
Fri Apr 18, 2014 9:27 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
RECALL OF LOCAL ELECTION OFFICERS – Summary of Key Points and Timeframes
July 2013
Recalls filed at the County level include: County Commissioner City, Village or Township Officer School Board Member Elective District Library Board Member Elective Metropolitan District Member
*NOTE: Due to legislation that was enacted in 2012, there are several new requirements that affect the overall timeframes in the recall process. In particular: Recall petition language may not be submitted for approval during an officeholder’s first and last six months of office; Recall petitions may not be circulated while an appeal is pending; Signed/circulated recall petitions may not be filed during the first six months or last six months of the officer’s term of office, if the term of office is two years or less; or during the first or last year of the officer’s term of office, if the term of office is greater than two years; Recall petition signatures dated more than 60 days before the filing are invalid.
Translating these timeframes into an overall plan will pose challenges for recall petition sponsors, and for County Clerks that must administer the recall process and recall elections. County Clerks should exercise caution in advising recall petition sponsors on these timeframes and processes. Call the Bureau of Elections (800-292-5973) if you need assistance. The step-by-step flows represented in this document (see Steps 1-4 which begin on page 2) highlight the required timeframes throughout the process. Below is a high-level summary of the relevant timeframes now involved in the major steps of the recall process.
OVERALL MANDATED RECALL TIMEFRAMES
Recall Process Step
Required Timeframe*
Petition language submitted for approval
NOT allowed during first or last 6 months of term
Clarity/Factual hearing held
Between 10 and 20 days after petition language submitted
Appeal of Clarity/Factual Determination
To Circuit Court, within 10 days of clarity/factual hearing determination (no circulation during appeal)
Circuit Court – final determination on appeal
Within 40 days of appeal
Recall language valid
Up until 180 days after approval of language (By County Election Commission or Circuit Court)
Signatures valid
60 days
Recall petition filed (signed/circulated petitions)
Officer with 2-Year Term or less: NOT allowed during first or last 6 months of term
Officer with greater than 2-Year Term: NOT allowed during first or last year of term
Determination of Petition’s Sufficiency/Insufficiency
35 days from date of filing
Recall Election
At least 95 days after recall petition filing AND held on the next regular May or November election date (whichever occurs first)
*NOTE: Be particularly careful when advising sponsors of the recall deadlines involving candidates with longer terms of office. Managing these deadlines is a complicated and confusing process. A sponsor that wishes to recall an officer with a four-year term of office as soon as legally possible (by submitting language for approval at 6 months), runs |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 18, 2014 9:38 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
|
|
Fri Apr 18, 2014 9:48 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
The group attempting to recall Bryant Nolden and other council members have been saying they want it on the August ballot. Well they need to check the changes to the law! gone are the days you get a simple recall because you don't like their vote on an issue or in this case revenge.
copied from the thread about chaos in the city council chambers
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FYI:
Please find the invitation sent to Mr. Nolden asking him to appear on my broadcast to explain his votes. Mr. Nolden reply was NO
Sent: Councilman Nolden: I am compelled to let you know how disappointed again I am for the way you voted on last night's resolution and motions! It's not what you say that counts, but how you VOTE! In other words, your actions spoke louder than your words.
When you first became the elected representative of the 3rd Ward, I tried very hard to help you to become an effective councilman for the People. I often tried to give you some directions and advise regarding city government and the 3rd Ward. I explained to you time and time again, that it's wasn't what you said, but it was all about how you vote. Time and time again, when the correct vote was needed on behalf of the 3rd Ward, you failed us
! When your vote for Donna Poplar was needed (after a commitment to Mr. Eason), you failed your friend Donna. When your vote for Councilman Eric Mays was needed after you committed you would vote for him for president, you also failed your friend.
When I both called and texted you, you didn't have the grace to return my call or text. If 45-50 people called you and asked you not to support the E.M. 7 point plan, including myself, you turned a deaf ear to We the People cries! Mr. Nolden, something is wrong with that picture! All being said, the vote has passed against the will of the People that contacted you. I'm inviting you to be my guest on the "Truth shall make you free" broadcast this Saturday morning on Flint's gospel radio station WFLT 1420 am from 9:30-10am. This is a call in show 810-239-5733 and calls are welcome. Will you accept my invitation to appear "live" on my show? I know you don't return my calls, but a simple text yes or no (without explanation) will suffice. Thank you, AC Dumas 810-275-5339
Post Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:54 pm
untanglingwebs
F L I N T O I D
Donna Poplar and Eric Mays both allegedly worked on the campaign for AC Dumas to defeat Bryant Nolden in the Third ward elections. Word was Poplar was angry that Nolden was not at the vote on her being on the Hurley Board of Directors and she was furious. Nolden was working on a grant presentation for the Berston Center and is not apologetic for putting the constituents ahead of Poplar's ambitions.
Per this e-mail, Mr. Dumas considers himself the expert on being an effective councilman and choses to chastise Nolden for going his own way.
Nolden says he never promised to vote for Donna Poplar for the Hurley Hospital Board. He also says he never committed to support Mays for President. Nolden votes his conscience, so who does he have to answer to?
The desires of a small group of people who are not in possession of all of the facts do not always make a persuasive argument. Some of these same speakers were part of a Acorn group that entered the chambers chanting and later made an attempt to take over City Hall. Harris and Shariff were part of the attempted take over.
Can you imagine council if Mays was the council president?
Post Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:09 pm |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:03 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
If the recall people are so against this vote, then why aren't they planning to recall all five who voted in favor of the move towards transition back to self governance. City Council is back to a "my way or the highway" bunch of radicals out for self-aggrandizement. They ignore the real corruption in our midst.
Alex Harris has been known to rant and rave at council meeting and got removed at least once. He was a lobbyist for Rilo Homes and never filled out the appropriate paperwork. Claims he wasn't paid for his work. He appeared to be driven by his hatred of Williamson.
Eric Mays has lobbied for liquor stores more than once. He admits he was paid. But once again the council did not enforce the Charter rules on disclosure and filing as a lobbyist. He is a recall leader and participated in many recalls. Art Busch, then Genesee County Prosecutor, an Inez Brown, City Clerk, have both filed complaints involving Mays. Mays admitted being paid by a city vendor to stage a failed recall aginst former Mayor Williamson.
Nayirah Shariff often strutted her stuff in support of ACORN. I remember the first time ACORN marched into the council chambers shouting their slogans. They also attempted a coup and takeover of City Hall. I remember they were filmed knocking down a city official and disrupting the peace. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:24 am |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
