Controversial East Lansing Charter Amendment is Now in the Governor’s Hands

In a surprise twist, Governor Gretchen Whitmer is expected to decide Monday or Tuesday (Aug. 14 or 15) whether a controversial East Lansing City Charter amendment proposal will make it to the November 7 ballot.

The proposed amendment calls for changing the years East Lansing’s electorate votes for City Council members from odd-numbered years to even-numbered years.

On July 11, three members of City Council – Mayor Ron Bacon, Mayor Pro Tem Jessy Gregg and Dana Watson – voted to move this Charter change to the November ballot, with George Brookover and Noel Garcia voting against.

At today’s (Aug. 13) special City Council meeting, convened in part to address the question of who to appoint as city manager, City Attorney Tony Chubb explained that due to a complicated confluence of local and state legal issues, Governor Whitmer is now in the position of deciding whether this local amendment makes it to the ballot. Chubb described the issue as involving a “very complicated [legal] analysis.”

The deadline for moving the item to the ballot is Tuesday (Aug. 15).

The matter has brought out strong statements in favor and against.

Those in favor say it will add thousands more voters to the election because it will put the Council elections on the same ballot as national elections, races voters are more likely to participate in. Analysis by ELi of the last two elections show that the November 2021 Council election brought out 4,707 voters in East Lansing, while the November 2022 general election brought out 14,092 voters – about 9.000 more.

That, say critics of the proposed charter change, is the problem. They believe people voting in Council elections now are motivated to vote and relatively well-informed about Council candidates, whereas many voters in an even-numbered years may end up voting in Council races when they may know little about the City Council candidates or local ballot proposals. Critics also say the change will greatly increase the cost of running for City office and thus increase the power of those with access to more money.

Four other charter amendments have made it to the ballot, including one Council found pretty confusing.

On July 11, Council voted 4-1 to put on November’s ballot a Charter amendment aimed at bringing into line local swearing-in dates with state law requirements regarding ballot-counting. On July 19, Council voted 4-1 to also put on the ballot the question of whether to expand Council from five to seven members. (Brookover voted against in both cases.)

Now another set of two Charter amendments will be on the ballot in one proposal. This pair of amendments was brought forward by a local ballot initiative group called RankMIVote.

Chubb explained to Council today the group obtained enough East Lansing register voters’ signatures to put the matter on the November ballot.

This single ballot proposal would change the Charter in two ways. First, Chubb explained it would institute ranked-choice voting for East Lansing City Council elections, meaning it would “terminate the election of the Council by popular vote and replace it with ranked-choice voting.” Second, it would allow City Council to call for a special election to fill a vacant seat, rather than making an appointment.

Chubb explained to Council today that both of these changes are presently illegal under state law. If voted through, he said, they would essentially lie “dormant” in the Charter unless and until state law changes to make the actions legal.

Because state law requires ballot language for proposals to be limited to a maximum of 100 words, and because the petitioners did not propose succinct ballot language, Council is required to approve the ballot language for this proposal. The language is required to be “true and impartial.”

Chubb presented his own proposed language for Council to consider.

But Gregg said she was concerned Chubb’s proposed ballot language didn’t note that both actions would be illegal under present state law. She said this could mislead voters into thinking if they vote “yes,” these changes would actually take place and take place soon.

Gregg said she was concerned about “confusion at the very least, bitterness possibly. You know I always like to foster trust in government if at all possible, rather than confusion.”

“I honestly think the intention of this whole petition initiative is confusion,” Chubb answered.

He said he had tried to figure out how to add the information about the conflict with state law rendering the changes illegal and unenforceable. But he said adding such language might violate the requirement that the language be “impartial.”

Answering questions from Council today, Interim City Clerk Marie Wicks said ranked-choice voting would “create a sea-change in elections. The stated goal of this group [RankMIVote] is to have left-leaning cities adopt it…They would pursue a statewide constitutional amendment [for ranked-choice voting] in 2026.”

Wicks called the drive by RankMIVote “more of maybe an awareness effort,” since it will not result in actual changes in voting in East Lansing anytime soon. She said she asked members of the group to attend the Council meeting, but they did not appear.

The situation – leaving Council to decide on the ballot language for the petitioners – is, according to Chubb, rare. He said he had dealt with “hundreds” of ballot proposals and there had been “maybe two” that didn’t come with ballot language already articulated.

After some discussion, Council decided to pull language from the petition itself. The ballot initiative will now read this:

“RANKED CHOICE VOTING: IN THE EVENT THE MICHIGAN BUREAU OF ELECTIONS CERTIFIES THE PROCESS FOR THE USE OF RANKED CHOICE VOTING BEGINNING IN THE ELECTION OF 2023, OR SUCH SUBSEQUENT ODD YEAR ELECTION ONCE THE CONDITIONS OF A CERTIFIED PROCESS ARE SATISFIED, THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL BE ELECTED IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED IN THIS SECTION.”

There will be no reference in the ballot to “this section.” Those wanting to know what “this section” refers to must read the original petition. The ballot language will make no reference to the change of having Council potentially call special elections when there is a Council vacancy.