Duggan Ends Candidacy for Mayor - Will NOT Appeal To Supreme Court

[downtownguy]

Originally Posted by mam2009
The right decision was made.

dnt worry. We all know why your really feel like this.

Care to explain? Or, are you too busy studying for the spelling bee?

[corktownyuppie]

Duggan signed the affidavit that the qualifications were met. Why is it the clerk's job to voire dire him on those facts? Duggan has the duty to show he's qualified.

Just to clarify, when I say clerk, I don't mean "clerk" with a little "c", I mean "Clerk" with a big "c", as in Janice Winfrey, "City Clerk" whose official duty includes, "6. To supervise elections by virtue of the Clerk's position as Chairman of the Election Commission and Chief Elections Officer of the city."

Duggan claims that he explained his residency dates and asked the City Clerk to verify whether or not he met the requirements. And she did so affirmatively, not in a "well, did you sign the affidavit?" kind of way. But in a "Yes, as the official arbiter of the city elections, I verify that no corrective action is required." kind of way.

And that is where I believe Duggan has the strongest position. If the law was so inexplicably vague that the Chairman of the Election Commission also screwed it up, I think you automatically have to open up the can of worms regarding the law's intent.

However, one thing "wrong" you failed to mention is the fact that this is even an issue in the campaign of the guy who is supposed to have been the competent one. This is akin to a EM not paying his taxes... Should it be a death blow? probably not, however, it sure makes one wonder what the hell makes this guy any better of a choice if there is a mistake this huge over something so stupid.

Agreed. This should have been airtight, and I fault Duggan for this.

[Honky Tonk]

Just to clarify, when I say clerk, I don't mean "clerk" with a little "c", I mean "Clerk" with a big "c", as in Janice Winfrey, "City Clerk" whose official duty includes, "6. To supervise elections by virtue of the Clerk's position as Chairman of the Election Commission and Chief Elections Officer of the city."

Duggan claims that he explained his residency dates and asked the City Clerk to verify whether or not he met the requirements. And she did so affirmatively, not in a "well, did you sign the affidavit?" kind of way. But in a "Yes, as the official arbiter of the city elections, I verify that no corrective action is required." kind of way.

And that is where I believe Duggan has the strongest position. If the law was so inexplicably vague that the Chairman of the Election Commission also screwed it up, I think you automatically have to open up the can of worms regarding the law's intent.




Agreed. This should have been airtight, and I fault Duggan for this.

Good Post. So the fault is actually starting to shift a bit.

[rex]

Care to explain? Or, are you too busy studying for the spelling bee?

sure. Mams an old racist, the thought of a white man as mayor of Detroit makes her angry. Dnt worry about my spelling son. Before anyone responded to this thread I would have bet 1K that her response would have been exactly this. She might tint her views with different perspectives but it doesn't change anything. Feel free to disagree. You can count the ufcks i give on a fingerless hand.

[corktownyuppie]

Good Post. So the fault is actually starting to shift a bit.

This could be the straw that reverses the decision. From a statement Duggan's campaign made earlier today....

When I went to submit my petition signatures on April 2, 2013, the very professional elections staff at the Clerk’s office went through all my paperwork in great detail. Had there been any inkling of a problem that the petitions couldn’t be filed within a year of my voter registration, I would have just taken the petitions home and filed them two weeks later on April 16, 2013.

Now if only they had made "having a Detroit accent" a statutory requirement, that would be a game changer.

[Bham1982]

Now if only they had made "having a Detroit accent" a statutory requirement, that would be a game changer.[/FONT][/COLOR]

I find it quite telling that Duggan supporters are blaming his bumbling on black racism, when he has consistently been polling as the top or close second candidate in a 90% black city, despite his obvious outsider status.

And somehow roping in a white suburban judge in this racist conspiracy is even stranger.

Can you imagine if another one of the candidates had done this? But it's Duggan, and he's the new annointed savior, so forget the rules, blame the [[black) voters, and trash the judge.

[bailey]

This could be the straw that reverses the decision. From a statement Duggan's campaign made earlier today....

When I went to submit my petition signatures on April 2, 2013, the very professional elections staff at the Clerk’s office went through all my paperwork in great detail. Had there been any inkling of a problem that the petitions couldn’t be filed within a year of my voter registration, I would have just taken the petitions home and filed them two weeks later on April 16, 2013.

That is an interesting statement. I think his saving grace here is that he could have complied before the filing deadline.

However, I still don't understand that very large buried lede... if he wasn't a registered voter for a year until the 16th...what is he doing at the filing window two weeks early?

Further, just because they went through it professionally, doesn't mean they were checking dates. They could have just been making sure all the required forms were there and the signatures attesting to the truthfulness of the filings were in the right spots.

Were/have there been other candidates stopped at the filing window for failure to comply with dates?

[corktownyuppie]

That is an interesting statement. I think his saving grace here is that he could have complied before the filing deadline.

However, I still don't understand that very large buried lede... if he wasn't a
registered voter for a year until the 16th...what is he doing at the filing window two weeks early?

The problem is that everyone, including the City Clerk's office, interpreted "filing" as "by the filing deadline". I agree, he should've just waited it out just to be absolutely sure that there wasn't going to be any legal issue. But the problem is that the City Clerk's office was encouraging petitioners to have their paperwork filed "as early as possible" so that if any corrective action needed to be taken, there would be enough time to do so before ballots needed to be printed.

No matter how you look at it, this is a giant clusterphuck just because of miscommunication and unclear language.

From a non-partisan, "how do we prevent this in the future" perspective, what should have happened is that the City Clerk's office should have looked at the eligibility requirements 16 months prior to the filing deadline and given clear guidance about what specific dates for residency and petition gathering were necessary to meet the deadline. The Law Department should have examined the guidance and made amendments if necessary.

That will not stop legal arguments, of course. But it makes it crystal clear where the City's official position on the law was. While I think that Duggan's team was dumb to leave any possible loophole, it's like following the referee's instructions and then being punished for doing so.

[Eber Brock Ward]

He must have missed this sign outside of the Clerk's office, right mam?

[SWMAP]

I call a republican conspiracy at work here.

The Judge was an Engler appointee to the Court. She and her comrades in arms are, by removing the sole candidate with the experience, alliances and smarts to restore Detroit to some modicum of viability, guaranteeing the final and utter failure of Detroit by facilitating the election of the minimally experienced Napolean whose backers are the Republican-loved scrap metal industry operating in Detroit [[check all that out and you will see its true).

[Bham1982]

I call a republican conspiracy at work here.
.

Quite obviously. It's a black-Republican-anti-Irish conspiracy, being led by shadowy forces. The minimuim residency requirement plays no role in this whatsoever...

[bailey]

The problem is that everyone, including the City Clerk's office, interpreted "filing" as "by the filing deadline". I agree, he should've just waited it out just to be absolutely sure that there wasn't going to be any legal issue. But the problem is that the City Clerk's office was encouraging petitioners to have their paperwork filed "as early as possible" so that if any corrective action needed to be taken, there would be enough time to do so before ballots needed to be printed.

No matter how you look at it, this is a giant clusterphuck just because of miscommunication and unclear language.

From a non-partisan, "how do we prevent this in the future" perspective, what should have happened is that the City Clerk's office should have looked at the eligibility requirements 16 months prior to the filing deadline and given clear guidance about what specific dates for residency and petition gathering were necessary to meet the deadline. The Law Department should have examined the guidance and made amendments if necessary.

That will not stop legal arguments, of course. But it makes it crystal clear where the City's official position on the law was. While I think that Duggan's team was dumb to leave any possible loophole, it's like following the referee's instructions and then being punished for doing so.

I get the defense. What I don't get is that after reading:

ARTICLE 2. GENERAL PROVISIONSSec. 2-101. Qualifications for Elective Officers and Appointive Officers.
A person seeking elective office must be a citizen of the United States, a resident and a qualified and registered voter of the City of Detroit for one [[1) year at the time of filing for office, and retain that status throughout their tenure in any such elective office

I don't understand the confusion. That's just me though.. to me "at the time of filing" would mean the date I'm at the window making my filing, not some day a month later. I understand there is a claim of vagueness, that Duggan wasn't stopped because it may have been missed and/or interpreted differently.

I'm just at a loss as to why it's vague.

[SWMAP]

Even if you vote early and absentee, your vote isn't actualized until election day. Its like that. The government thinks the stated election day is when your vote takes effect.

[bailey]

Even if you vote early and absentee, your vote isn't actualized until election day. Its like that. The government thinks the stated election day is when your vote takes effect.

I don't know if that is an apt comparison. If it were, Duggan or anyone could have filed the day they registered to vote, so long as that was one year ahead of the last day to file for office of mayor. I don't think the clerk would accept that filing. If the court finds, or the clerk says that could happen, then maybe Duggan's claims will hold water. But again raises the question, if you were eligible to file all along, why wait at all?

I'm just wondering how they get past this:

Duggan's attorneys had intervened in the Barrow court case and argued that the charter language as adopted in 2012 is ambiguous. But Popke noted the differences between the charter and the language of a state law requiring that a candidate for the House of Rpresentatives be an elector "by the filing deadline."
"Certainly, had the framers of the Charter meant for the one-year time limitation … to be the statutory filing deadline, the framers could have simply adopted clear language found in many state election statutes existing at the time of [[the charter's) adoption…," the ruling states.

[1953]

None of the candidates were registered voters for precisely one year at the time they turned in their petitions, so no one is eligible to run. Oh snap, we have to have a new election altogether.

[Bham1982]

None of the candidates were registered voters for precisely one year at the time they turned in their petitions, so no one is eligible to run. Oh snap, we have to have a new election altogether.

Except that you're now making up a completely new rule, which has no relevance to the Duggan discussion.

All the candidates, except for Duggan, were Detroit residents for one year. There's no rule indicating you must file on the exact nanosecond by which one reaches one year of residency.

[Eber Brock Ward]

Except that you're now making up a completely new rule, which has no relevance to the Duggan discussion.

All the candidates, except for Duggan, were Detroit residents for one year. There's no rule indicating you must file on the exact nanosecond by which one reaches one year of residency.

As are people that are reading into it that "time of filing" concerns the candidate's time of filing, rather than the "time of filing" set by the clerk.

The statute is ambiguous and Duggan will be back in on appeal.

[coracle]

"I call a republican conspiracy at work here."

No. It's a lack of thoroughness on the part of the Duggan camp for not double checking the rules, and incompetency in the Clerk's Office for not catching it. [[unless the Clerk's Office set it up to fail for some reason).
If I were a Republican I wouldn't conspire just to take out the front runner; I'd make certain Mr. Orr [[or an alternate) could be re-instated every eighteen months to ensure none of the candidates would succeed. It's the only way to full recovery.

[firstandten]

I am not as much into the merits of the timing of Duggan's residency and of his filing for office as I am disappointed that he and his team allowed a technicality to possibly derail his candidacy. I'm sure just like in the case of Rahm Emanuel, Duggan will be allowed back on the ballot on appeal. However this is a huge distraction and it makes me wonder if Duggan and his team can't get this right just how good of a mayor can he be ?

[finster]

I can certainly see the merits of both arguments in this case. Hard core politics is a blood sport so many candidates will play to any advantage they can. For all we know the Duggan camp might have done the same.

I predict he will be reinstated on the ballot on appeal, but unfortunately if he wins we will constantly be told how he "stole the election" for the next umpteenth years!

[Wesley Mouch]

I get the defense. What I don't get is that after reading: I don't understand the confusion. That's just me though.. to me "at the time of filing" would mean the date I'm at the window making my filing, not some day a month later. I understand there is a claim of vagueness, that Duggan wasn't stopped because it may have been missed and/or interpreted differently.

I'm just at a loss as to why it's vague.

Most everything in life is vague. This law isn't so vague. What we are seeing as vague is a perfectly reasonable statement that you can't just stroll into town and run for mayor. You have to live in the city for a year. Duggan did that. There's nothing vague about that.

Now if you really want to start parsing things into tiny little logical bits you can find problems. We don't help ourselves when we stoop to that level.

[mam2009]

sure. Mams an old racist, the thought of a white man as mayor of Detroit makes her angry. Dnt worry about my spelling son. Before anyone responded to this thread I would have bet 1K that her response would have been exactly this. She might tint her views with different perspectives but it doesn't change anything. Feel free to disagree. You can count the ufcks i give on a fingerless hand.

What???!!!! What have i EVER posted that makes me "an old racist". I think you have me mixed up with someone else.

[artds]

Even if you vote early and absentee, your vote isn't actualized until election day. Its like that. The government thinks the stated election day is when your vote takes effect.

Great analogy. I was thinking of something along these lines earlier but wasn't sure how to phrase it. Having the date you decide to submit your signatures be the critical date for purposes of whether you meet the residency requirement is an absurd interpretation of the rule. The only reasonable interpretation is that the deadline for filing to be a candidate for a particular election cycle is the critical date.

[artds]

I am not as much into the merits of the timing of Duggan's residency and of his filing for office as I am disappointed that he and his team allowed a technicality to possibly derail his candidacy. I'm sure just like in the case of Rahm Emanuel, Duggan will be allowed back on the ballot on appeal. However this is a huge distraction and it makes me wonder if Duggan and his team can't get this right just how good of a mayor can he be ?

This wasn't a fuckup. Duggan was assured by an election official that he was doing more than was necessary by turning in his paperwork early. He specifically asked them if there was any reason to wait, and they assured him there was not.

[artds]

I can certainly see the merits of both arguments in this case. Hard core politics is a blood sport so many candidates will play to any advantage they can. For all we know the Duggan camp might have done the same.

I predict he will be reinstated on the ballot on appeal, but unfortunately if he wins we will constantly be told how he "stole the election" for the next umpteenth years!

Nah. Stealing an election implies that you had some unfair advantage. That's not the case here.