According to this story, Inez Brown, city clerk of Flint, Michigan, says she would rather conduct this year’s city election as an all write-in election, rather than have SB329 or HB 4589 pass. Those bills say she and other employees of her office would be required to undergo hours of special training, but the bills also put the candidates for Mayor and City Council on this year’s ballot.
Under current law, there are no candidates for those offices on the city ballot because all candidates submitted late or inadequate petitions. Most petitions were late because the City Clerk’s office misinformed the candidates of the actual deadline.
In 2013, the winner of Detroit’s Mayoral election was a write-in candidate. Some years ago, the winner of the Democratic primary for Mayor of Washington, D.C., won with write-in votes.
SB 329 passed the Senate. When SB 529 and HB 4589 were heard in committee, they were amended to include a number of training and auditing requirements.
It also includes the following gem:
“(7) If the city clerk who published a nominating petition filing deadline that is different than the fifteenth Tuesday before the odd year primary election or odd year general election is no longer the city clerk of that city, the requirements of subsection 15 (6)(a), (b), (c), (e), and (f) do not apply.”
In Texas, it is generally unconstitutional to have a law apply to a specific city or person, but there is always a way to describe a class that only one area or person qualifies for.
So in this case, rather saying that if Inez Brown is fired, quits, or dies, all the special training and auditing provisions don’t apply; it applies to any city clerk who
made the mistake that Inez Brown did.