The Charter Commission of Portland, Maine, has arranged to ask city voters if they wish to amend the charter, and elect a Mayor with a citywide vote using Instant Runoff Voting. The popular vote will be on November 2, 2010. See this story.
Currently, Portland voters do not elect a Mayor. Instead they merely elect a city council, and the council chooses one of its own members to act as Mayor. Thanks to Thomas MacMillan for the link.
On July 1, U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Bataillon, a Clinton appointee, refused to grant an injunction against Nebraska’s ban on out-of-state circulators. Citizens in Charge v Gale, 4:09cv-3255. The six-page order relies on the fact that in 2001, the 8th circuit in a North Dakota case had upheld a similar ban.
The 8th circuit is the only circuit in which any U.S. Court of Appeals has ever upheld a ban on out-of-state circulators. The 2001 case was from North Dakota. The other states in the 8th circuit, besides Nebraska, are South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, and Arkansas. The latter four states do not ban out-of-state circulators.
The order also doubts that the ban actually makes it more expensive for petitions to be completed when an out-0f-state ban exists, citing the travel expenses to bring out-of-state circulators into the state.
On June 30, the 10th circuit affirmed last year’s U.S. District Court decision in New Mexico Youth Organized v Herrera, 09-2212. The 19-page decision is here. Two organizations, New Mexico Youth Organized, and Southwest Organizing Project, sent out direct mail in the spring of 2008, criticizing two New Mexico State Senators for their votes on certain bills in the legislature. The two Senators complained to the Secretary of State that the two organizations had never filed as political committees. The Secretary of State initially said the law didn’t require the organizations to do that.
The New Mexico Attorney General had then advised the Secretary of State that the two organizations should be told that they must register as political committees. This would have meant that they had to file the names and addresses of their officers, and make periodic reports of expenditures and contributions. Both the U.S. District Court and the 10th circuit ruled that states do not have the authority to regulate groups that way, because the groups did not explicitly tell voters to vote against the State Senators, nor to vote for the opponents of those State Senators. Furthermore the organizations were not formed specifically to influence voters to vote in a certain manner. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the news.
On July 1, a state court judge in Georgia dismissed the lawsuit that had been filed by Mary Norwood, over the validity of between 8,000 and 9,000 signatures with the county name pre-printed on the petition forms. See this story. That does not necessarily mean that the petitions will not be counted. It appears the judge didn’t believe the lawsuit is ripe. It is possible that Norwood will have enough signatures even without the disputed signatures; and it is also possible that the Fulton County elections office will recognize the signatures as valid.
On June 30, a Solano County, California Superior Court Judge suggested orally that he will not alter the state’s recognition of Markham Robinson as state chair of the American Independent Party. Robinson is the leader of the faction of the party that is opposed to the national Constitution Party, and the faction that put Alan Keyes on the November 2008 ballot as the AIP’s presidential candidate.
The Robinson faction of the AIP held its state convention and state central committee meeting on June 26 in Sacramento. Eleven members of the State Central Committee attended. A few individuals who are entitled to be on the State Central Committee, but who are opposed to Robinson’s leadership, were initially seated but shortly afterwards told they would not be permitted to remain in the room.
The faction of the AIP that is associated with the Constitution Party will hold its own state convention and state central committee meeting in August, and that meeting is expected to have a much larger attendance of State Central Committee members. However, the passage of Proposition 14 makes it even more difficult than before for any neutral person to say with confidence who is or is not a proper member of the AIP state central committee. The election code sets forth internal rules for the American Independent Party. It says that the party’s nominees for federal and state office are automatically members of the committee, and that nominees for public office may also make other appointments to the committee. But under Proposition 14, parties no longer have nominees (except for President). Proposition 14 and its implementing legislation did not directly alter the AIP code section. Proposition 14 does not go into effect until 2011, but the implementing language, contained in Senate Bill 6, has already gone into effect.
The Superior Court will hold another hearing on July 21 to see if attorneys for the Robinson faction should be sanctioned for failing to appear for some depositions earlier this year.
There is no written order yet from the June 30 hearing.
