Michigan ballot news
From Ballotpedia
| ||
| Propositions • | Recall | • Law |
Here you'll find a collection of ballot news stories from Michigan.
Michigan insurance rate reduction petition approved
LANSING, Michigan: The Michigan Insurance Rate Reduction Initiative (2010) petition was unanimously approved for circulation by a state election panel on Monday. Proponents, which includes the measure's sponsors "Fair Affordable Insurance Rates", must collect a minimum of 304,000 valid signatures in 180 days in order to place the measure on the November 2010 statewide ballot.[1] The measure proposes cutting insurance premiums for good drivers by 20 percent in addition to a 20 percent rollback. Additionally, the measure, if approved, would include various consumer protections. Insurance industry representatives oppose the initiative. Representatives argue that without cutting costs the rate reductions may only cause hardships for insurers. Kim Bowman, an aide to Sen. Hansen Clarke, supports the proposed measure. Gov. Jennifer Granholm also called for a 20 percent cut in insurance rates.[2]
Mining restriction proposal filed for Michigan's 2010 ballot
LANSING, Michigan: A mining restriction proposal has been filed and accepted by the state election board. The proposal calls for tougher laws on mining in order to protect the Great Lakes as well as local inland lakes, rivers and the overall environment from contamination. The petition was filed by the Michigan Save Our Water Committee. In order to place the measure on the November 2010 ballot supporters must collect a minimum of 300,000 valid signatures by May 2010.[3]
The measure proposes:[4]
- prohibiting uranium mining and processing until new rules are established
- requiring that sulfide and other types of mines be located 2,000 feet from lakes, streams and rivers
Michigan Court of Appeals OKs Detroit's Proposal D
DETROIT, Michigan: Yesterday the Michigan Court of Appeals ordered that the Detroit Council Election Reform Referenum, also known as Proposal D, be placed on the November 3, 2009 ballot. "The citizens of the city of Detroit are entitled to have the proposal placed on the ballot so that the people can express their choice on the proposal," said appeals judges.[5] The ruling came only days after Wayne County Circuit Court Chief Judge Virgil Smith ruled not to place the measure on the ballot. Previously, the Detroit Election Commission voted in favor of placing the measure on the ballot but was objected by the Attorney General's Office who wrote a letter stating that the ballot measure language was not clear enough for the ballot.[6]
According to the court of appeals' ruling, the ballot language should read: Shall the Detroit City Charter be amended to provide for a total of nine members of the City Council with one (1) council member with district residency elected from each of seven (7) districts and two (2) members elected at large?[5]
Detroit City Council election reform heads to November ballot
DETROIT, Michigan: This week the Detroit Election Commission voted in favor of placing Proposal D, also known as the Detroit Council Election Reform Referendum on the November 3, 2009 ballot in Wayne County. The commission voted 2 to 1.[7] The measure proposes creating districts for seven council members and having two at-large members. Currently, the nine council members can reside anywhere in the city and are not restricted by district lines.[8] Just two weeks ago referendum supporters submitted approximately 30,000 signatures, enough to meet the required 28,000 signatures to place the measure on the ballot. The measure requires a simple majority to pass.[9] Former state Rep. Steve Tobocman, who helped collected signatures, said,"I live in southwest Detroit and no one represents me."[8] The signature drive was also backed by the League of Women Voters in Detroit.[9]
Although the referendum was approved for the November ballot, the measure may still face some legal problems. On Monday, August 26, the Attorney General's Office wrote in a letter that the petition language was not clear enough to go on the ballot.[9]
Michigan Democrats announce possible 2010 ballot proposals
LANSING, Michigan: Recently Mark Brewer, Michigan Democrat party chairman, announced a variety of ballot proposals for the 2010 statewide ballot. Brewer said that the proposals are aimed at protecting residents during the hard economic times that not only the state but also the country is facing.[10]
In response Gov. Jennifer Granholm said that she is pleased by the Democratic party's proposals. Specifically, she said she is "committed to job creation and protecting people during these challenging times -- and is pleased that the Democratic Party is considering proposals that do the same."[11]
However, not everybody agrees with the Democratic proposals. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce called the proposals "anti-jobs and anti-growth." Chamber president Rich Studley said,"Mark Brewer is playing with fire. The political and economic uncertainty caused by these anti-business proposals would do serious damage to our state's economic competitiveness."[12]
Possible ballot proposals include:[11]
- Raise minimum wage to $10 per hour
- Impose a 12 month moratorium on foreclosures
- Cut utility bills by 20%
- Require employers to provide health care to employees and dependents
- Increase eligibility and unemployment benefits by $100 per week for 6 months
Michigan town submits zoning petition for referendum
GANGES, Michigan: The Ganges zoning referendum will likely be on the November ballot following the submission of approximately 307 signatures last month. The petition is supported by a group called Ganges For All. The referendum calls for citizens to decide if the parcel should be rezoned. The referendum comes in light of a recent 3-2 decision by the town board to rezone approximately 1 acre of residential land for commercial use. Controversy surrounding the zoning decision developed after news that although the county planning commission accepted the plan, the the planning commission did not recommend the rezoning. Shortly after the town board's decision, two of the planning commissions members resigned. Andy Murch, a supporter of the referendum, said that the group is "focused on educating people on the township master plan," and because they seek "objective and consistent decision-making." Opponents call the petition a "waste of time."
Currently township officials are verifying the signatures but as long as 180 of them are valid the township board will decide to place it on the ballot. The referendum could be placed on the ballot as early as this year or as late as November 2010.[13]
See also
References
| |||||
