2003 House Bill 4824 - Michigan Votes

Legislation watch

2003 House Bill 4824

Public Act 302 of 2003

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. John Stakoe (R) on June 10, 2003, to require all local and state primary, general, and special elections in the state, including school elections, to be held on one of four days during the year: the last Tuesday in February, or the Tuesday after the first Monday in either May, August, or November. This would not apply to special elections called by the Governor to fill vacancies in statewide or legislative offices. The bill is part of an election consolidation package comprised of House Bills 4820 to 4828, and Senate Bill 877, which was introduced later. House bill 4820 deals with school elections, and Senate Bill 877 sets the rules for a school "floater" election date.
- Referred to the House Local Government and Urban Policy Committee on June 10, 2003.
- Reported in the House on June 17, 2003, without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Amendment offered by Rep. John Pappageorge (R) on June 19, 2003, to make the proposed regular May school election date the official education election date, along the lines of that in House Bill 4830. The amendment failed in the House by voice vote on June 19, 2003.
- Substitute offered by Rep. Chris Ward (R) on June 19, 2003, to replace the previous version of the bill with one which would allow school districts to call one special bond, millage or debt election per year on a date that is not on one of the proposed regular election dates, and is not within 30 days of one of them (a “floater” date), if a petition is signed by at least 10 percent of the number of electors voting in the last gubernatorial election in that district, or 3,000 electors, whichever is less. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on June 19, 2003.
- Amendment offered by Rep. David Woodward (D) on June 19, 2003, to require popular elections for all intermediate school districts (ISDs) board members. The amendment failed in the House (14 to 81) on June 19, 2003. [Vote Details and Comments]
Passed in the House (76 to 27) on June 19, 2003, to require all local and state primary, general, and special elections in the state, including school elections, to be held on one of four days during the year: the fourth Tuesday in February, or the Tuesday after the first Monday in either May, August, or November. This would not apply to special elections called by the Governor to fill vacancies in statewide or legislative offices. School districts would be allowed to call one special bond, millage or debt election per year on a date that is not on one of the proposed regular election dates, and is not within 30 days of one of them (a “floater” date), if a petition is signed by at least 10 percent of the number of electors voting in the last gubernatorial election in that district, or 3,000 electors, whichever is less. The bill is part of an election consolidation package comprised of House Bills 4820 to 4828. See also Senate Bill 877. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the Senate on June 24, 2003.
- Referred to the Senate Government Operations and Reform Committee on June 24, 2003.
  - Reported in the Senate on December 11, 2003, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on December 11, 2003, to replace the previous version of the bill with one which incorporates technical changes and which accomodates Senate Bill 877, which sets the rules for the school "floater" election date. The substitute passed in the Senate by voice vote on December 11, 2003.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Gilda Jacobs (D) on December 11, 2003, to allow school districts to hold elections in June. The amendment failed in the Senate by voice vote on December 11, 2003.
Passed in the Senate (29 to 9) on December 11, 2003, to require all local and state primary, general, and special elections in the state, including school elections, to be held on one of four days during the year: the last Tuesday in February, or the Tuesday after the first Monday in either May, August, or November. This would not apply to special elections called to fill vacancies in statewide or legislative offices. School districts would be allowed to call one special bond, millage or debt election per year on a Tuesday that is not on one of the proposed regular election dates, and is not within 35 days of one of them (a “floater” date), if a petition is signed by at least 10 percent of the number of district voters voting in the last gubernatorial election, or 3,000 electors, whichever is less. The bill is part of an election consolidation package comprised of House Bills 4820 to 4828, and Senate Bill 877. House bill 4820 deals with school elections, and Senate Bill 877 sets the rules for the school "floater" date. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the House on December 16, 2003.
Passed in the House (83 to 25) on December 18, 2003, to concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill. [Vote Details and Comments]
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on January 8, 2004.

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) School elections [by Anonymous Citizen on March 10, 2007]
Boy talk about full circle, we seperated school elections because they go lost on the November ballot and now we are putting them back to get lost. Why not take the school election back they way they were before the Ward changes. Let them hold their own when they want and where. Let them conduct them. Lower cost and the public knows what is going on.
Reply

Line

2) "no vote explantion" [by Admin003 on June 23, 2003]
Reps. Adamini and Anderson, having reserved the right to explain their protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I voted no on HB 4820-23, HB 4824 (H-1), HB 4825-8 for the following reasons:

1. This package removes local control from school boards and transfers it to other local units of government. Once there is absence of local control, things can go out of control.

2. There are numerous school districts where the boundaries are not coterminous with the corresponding township, city or village. Thereby, this package would force these local clerks to divide precincts into correct school districts. Even with the Qualified Voter File, this mandate would be very laborious for local clerks.

3. Those who support this package pull out the worse case scenarios where the turnout rate is low and there is little to none publicity about school elections. To the contrary, there are many school districts that publicize their elections and have active participation. For example, the Jackson ISD had an election in the same month where voters where choosing the replacement for their state representative in a special election. The turn out was greater for the ISD election than the other one. This proves with proper notice that all school boards do not run stealth elections.

4. If it is the goal of the sponsors to increase voter turnout, other mechanisms such as same day voter registration and no excuse absentee ballot would be more effective."
Reply

Line

3) Rep. Bieda's "no vote explanation" [by Admin003 on June 23, 2003]
Rep. Bieda, having reserved the right to explain his his protest against the passage of the bill, vote, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I respect what the good representative from Oakland County is attempting to accomplish with this amendment, however I voted against it because creating additional elective offices by amendment to the consolidation of election bill package is not the appropriate legislative
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation