Monday, March 28, 2011

Confused does not begin how I feel about the district 2 race and Jessica.  Craig Grove does not have legal training and therefore cannot be faulted for the way he seems to be arguing this case.  But if I understand the endless argument - this is all that matters.

COB filing deadlines govern - case closed.
"We accordingly conclude that San Juan's Charter filing deadline applies here. Ramirez does not dispute that relators attempted to file their applications within that deadline. Further, the only reason Ramirez gave for rejecting relators' applications was the deadline in Election Code section 143.007. We therefore hold that Ramirez was required to accept the applications and place relators' names on the ballot"
Re: San Juanita SANCHEZ, Pete Garcia, and Esperanza Lopez Flores, Relators ,  81 S.W.3d 794, 798  (Tex. 2002)

As I noted before both Ben Neece and Ed Stapleton messed up the case they worked on because they did not know the Texas Supreme Court has immediate jurisdiction if the printing of the ballots is too close for a full review by the trial court or court of appeals.  This needs to be filed now.  It may need to be  filed in both the Texas Supreme Court and trial court on the same day.  I will pay the trial court filing fee.

Here is the opinion without citation -

The other issue is how do you count the signatures - it is governered by state law.  see section d.

The Texas Election Code:

Sec. 143.005. APPLICATION FOR HOME-RULE CITY OFFICE. (a) A city charter may prescribe requirements in connection with a candidate's application for a place on the ballot for an office of a home-rule city. This section does not authorize a city charter requirement in connection with the timely filing of an application, and any charter requirement related to an application's timely filing is superseded by Section 143.007 and other applicable filing provisions prescribed by this code.

(b) If a city charter prescribes the requirements that a candidate's application must satisfy for
the candidate's name to be placed on the ballot, Section 141.031(a)(4)(L) also applies to the application. The other provisions of Section 141.031 do not apply.

(c) If a city charter requires candidates to pay a filing fee, the amount of the fee and an alternative procedure to payment of the fee shall be prescribed by the charter or by ordinance under charter authorization. However, if an ordinance prescribing an alternative procedure to payment of a filing fee is adopted before the effective date of this code without charter authorization, the ordinance, as it exists on the effective date of this code, continues in effect until the adoption of a charter provision prescribing an alternative procedure or authorizing prescription of an alternative procedure by ordinance.

(d) For any petition required or authorized to be filed in connection with a candidate's application for a place on the ballot for an office of a home-rule city, the minimum number of signatures that must appear on the petition is the greater of:

(1) 25; or

(2) one-half of one percent of the total vote received in the territory from which the office is elected by all candidates for mayor in the most recent mayoral general election.

(e) If the city charter of a home-rule city with a population of more than 1.18 million that holds nonpartisan elections for its offices requires both a petition and a $50 fee

I hope this helps - but to be honest I cannot make heads or tales over Carig Groves argument - but if the issue is whether Texas of COB filing deadline applies - the law is clear - COB law applies.


Anonymous said...

If I understand you correctly, you say the city charter rules with regard to the filing deadline. Are you saying that candidates can still turn in signatures and have their NAME placed on the ballot up until 30 days before the election as it states in our charter?

But are you also saying that the charter is superceded as to the number of signatures needed to be placed on the ballot?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

BobbyWC said...

Great question - but be real - me be short?

There are two issues:

The Supreme Court decision says the filing deadline is governed by the city charter.

The Statute says the signatures needed are governed by the election code.

I know it is confusing - apparently Home Rule has come to mean nothing - some of this is based on home rule and some is based on state law - hence all of the confusion.

I also recommend you read the opinion and form your own opinion.

But on each issue I think the law is balck and white - filing deadline - city charter - number of signatures - state statute 143.005

Best to have a lawyer double check my work - but you can read and form your own opinion.

My true readers know I prefer when people take my information and form their own opinion.

Bobby WC

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Our charter calls for election day to be on the first Saturday in May. The state election code requires a uniform election day of the second Saturday in May. In that part of the Code, it states the election date is what the state says regardless of what you find in any home-rule city charter. The case you cite is 9 years old. Has there been a change in the state law that specifically gives state law precedence over a charter's filing deadline as well? Would it not make the case you cite moot? Absent that I agree that our charter governs it's own filing deadline.

Some in Charlie's camp are arguing Jessica does not live in the district. Jessica says she still resides in the district. Is there any case law indicating a person's voting residence can be different from their physical address if they feel as though they still "live" in another address or plan on returning there one day?

BobbyWC said...

this just makes me more confused,

I will say I defended a Dallas Cit Counsel person before the grand jury on this issue of where they live.

I could be wrong but I think it came down to electric bills and such and intent where they wanted to live.

It was some 20 years ago - my memory is going

Charlie will stop at nothing - he knows if he has an opponent he is toast

Bobby WC