NOMINATING PETITION DEADLINE                                                         H.B. 4892 (H-1):

                                                                                                    SUMMARY OF BILL

                                                                                      REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE

House Bill 4892 (Substitute H-1 as reported without amendment)

Sponsor:  Representative Lee Chatfield

House Committee:  Elections and Ethics

Senate Committee:  Elections and Government Reform

CONTENT

The bill would amend the Michigan Election Law to do the following:

-- Allow an adjustment to be made in the nominating petition filing deadline for candidates for city offices in the 2017 election, if a city clerk published a filing deadline different from the deadline set in the Law, the clerk did not publicly correct the error within a certain time frame, and candidates relied on the incorrect deadline.

-- Require the Secretary of State to direct the city clerk to include on the general election ballot the names of all eligible candidates who properly filed nominating petitions by the 11^th Tuesday before the August primary election.

-- Require the city clerk who made the error to attend an election training school and submit nominating petitions and other items to the Secretary of State; and provide that the city would be subject to a $2,500 civil fine.

-- Require the Secretary of State to conduct postelection audits in the city in 2017, 2018, and 2019, and to conduct an administrative audit of the city clerk's elections operations.

-- Require the Secretary of State to conduct pre-election precinct election inspector training for inspectors at any August or November election held in the city in 2017.

-- Provide that, beginning January 1, 2018, a city would be subject to a civil fine of $5,000 if it published a filing deadline different from the deadline set in the Law, the deadline were not publicly corrected within a certain time frame, and potential candidates relied on the incorrect deadline.

MCL 168.644f                                                          Legislative Analyst:  Nathan Leaman

FISCAL IMPACT

The bill would not have any significant cost to the Department of State. The trainings and audits that would be required by the bill are already in place and currently offered by the

Department. Any additional costs as a result of the bill would be absorbed within current annual appropriations.

All fine revenue collected under the bill would be deposited with the State Treasury and credited to the Department of State to pay for any costs associated with enforcement of Section 644f of the Election Law (the section the bill would amend).

Date Completed:  9-13-17                                                    Fiscal Analyst:  Joe Carrasco

This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.