Here's a good look at how the signatures are verified -- note that California appears to have a looser proof standard than many states and therefore a higher approval rate.
Is Gavin Newsom a fan of the blog? He notes on CNN that California has the easiest gubernatorial recall law in the US.
Accentuate the partisanship and let's start talking about the money -- Politico also looks at who is running the Newsom effort.
Here's my podcast interview with San Francisco Chronicle's Joe Garofoli.
Arizona House Speaker Russell Bowers (R) is facing a recall effort from a further right group over not calling a special session during the Coronavirus pandemic (presumably to overturn the governor's shutdown procedures) and the "failure to protect the integrity of the 2020 election" by a group looking to overturn the results of the election.
Petitioners need 22,331 signatures by June 17.
Here's a lot more on it with some of my comments on whether the recall can be helped by a petition drive taking place at the same time. Reminds me of the crypto-initiative issue.
Petitions have been taken out against State Representative Mark Finchem (R) over his alleged support for the Capitol Hill riots on January 6th and the attempted overthrow of the presidential election. The effort had been facing questions after the Chair of the Casa Grande Democrats, Ralph Atchue stepped back from the effort to let professionals run it. Representative Athena Salman (D) has also introduced a resolution to expel Finchem. Finchem accepted more than $6000 from Trump in Recount legal consulting. After facing an ethics complaint, Finchem filed ethic complaints against nearly all Democrats in the state legislature, which went nowhere.
Petitioners would need 24,774 signatures in 120 days.
Did the Secretary of State drop the ball in not appealing the ruling allowing 120 more days to get signatures? Democratic consultant Garry South says yes. The issue appears to be the SoS' willingness in allowing more time for two initiatives.
Newsom says he will appoint Black woman to any potential opening in Dianne Feinstein's seat, pushing the obvious partisan angle to play in a very Democratic state.
New poll has Newsom up 42%-38% in recall vote. The polls seem to show a straight line on the removal vote, so far, not topping 40%. I suspect the negatives may be the most important topline finding in any poll here.
More stories on the recall -- I'm quoted in the Guardian one.
Kentucky does not appear to have recall elections of individuals, but they do have laws that allow for a recall of a school district tax increase. A new law was passed that lower the signature requirement for a school district tax recall to 5000 signatures from the current requirement of 10% of total voters. A Jefferson County recall failed to get on the ballot because of the 35,517 signatures needed.
The newest recall proposed legislation in Alberta has an odd issue, as it includes procedures for the recall election of MLAs (60 days to collect 40% of eligible voters), but the portion dealing with local officials and school board members do not include an actual vote. They will be removed by the handing in of signatures.
This column criticizes the recall law as setting to high a bar and claiming it is a betrayal of the old Wildrose Party, which had pushed for a recall law in Alberta.
Camarillo Vice Mayor Shawn Mulchay and Council member Susan Santangelo are facing petitions over their support for Black Lives Matter protests. There are also claims that the two wanted to defund the police, though that is denied, Petitioners need 9475 signatures by April 15. Since 2018, Camarillo moved from an at large system to a district-based one, though apparently all Camarillo residents would be able to vote in a recall.
Update: Here's a letter looking for a signature removal effort.
Hagerman City Mayor Alan Jay survived a recall vote, 116-129. The complaints seem all over the place, including a Covid pandemic issue, but there are complaints about enforcement of the city codes and alleged misappropriation of funds. They needed 162 votes.
Is this just some small subset of the population? Or is this a real statement that voters may have been upset enough about the shutdowns to sign petitions, but now are not willing to kick someone out over it?
*** Just some point about the nomenclature. As opposed to the Queen of the Hill rule (used when several amendments are trying to impact a law, so the one with the most votes wins), a King of the Hill provision is when the last vote is the one that counts, no matter if an earlier one gets the most votes. I have used the phrase Absentee Veto provision (where a recall vote must exceed a certain turnout number -- say 30% of the electorate must vote, making it more valuable to sit it out than to vote against. This provision is used frequently overseas).
After counting seven outstanding ballots, Woodmere Village Council member Craig Wade has now lost his seat, 91-88, joining Council President Jennifer Mitchell Earley (93-80) and members Lisa Brockwell (90-83) and Glenda Todd Miller (89-85). Wade seemed to have survived on the election day vote (85-87).
Replacements will be named by the remaining council. If they can't make a decision, the mayor chooses.
The recall was over seemingly over the lack of a sidewalk on a road and an out of date website. Perhaps most interesting is a fight over chickens -- one person bought chicks for his children and they kept escaping. The council allegedly took too long in give a special use permit to construct a structure to hold the chicks, so they gave them away. The recall seems to also be about new residents versus old ones in a 900 person village, as well as a battle between the Council President and Mayor.
State Senator Josh Newman (D) who lost a recall in 2018 only to comeback and win election in 2020 is proposing two bills to make recalls a bit more difficult (neither will impact the Newsom recall effort).
One bill will give the recall target access to the name of signers, with some privacy protections.
The second bill would ban paying signature collectors per signature (rather than by hour -- this is type of law exists in other stats). Actually, according to what I've read, paying by signature has been around since basically the beginning of direct democracy in California. In the early days, veterans and widows were considered the best signature gatherers.
There has been a push for the recall law in India for a number of years. This article notes that the ancient Tamil Nadu system had a recall law.
Oregon City has elected interim Mayor Rachel Lyles Smith to a full term to replace Dan Holladay who lost a recall vote with over 68% voting for his removal. Lyles Smith, who was serving after moving up due to her role as President of the Oregon City Commission, won 42-29%. Turnout was 27% a drop of half from the recall.
Holladay faced the recall over his opposition to the stay at home order to fight the coronavirus pandemic and his complaining about the protests following the killing of George Floyd. They got over 2400 signatures. They need 1828 signatures. The previous two mayors (who supported Holladay) have signed a letter calling the behavior "disturbing." The cost would be between $30,000 - $60,000.
This is the first mayoral recall to get on the ballot in Oregon City history (it is Oregon's oldest city).
Here's a good column looking at the lawsuit which had been filed seeking to overturn a city clerk's ruling throwing out signatures in the recall effort against Westminster Mayor Herb Atchison and Councilmembers Anita Seitz, Kathryn Skulley and Jon Voelz. The recall was over water bills.
The litigation may help push any election till November.
Petitioners needed 25% of turnout, which is 5009 signatures for Atchison and 6,098 for the three council members. Skulley's signatures missed by 61; Atchison by 282; Voelz by 635 and Seitz by 757.
Petitioners are represented by former Secretary of State Scott Gessler (R). They are claiming that the petitions were unlawfully thrown out because it was missing an informational page or because they were placed behind page one of the official petitions. Petitioners claim that the clerk allowed other packets to be corrected.
Petitioners claim to have 2,060,000 signatures for the recall
Experts offer some comments
Welp, might as well at least acknowledge this:
10 years ago today, the Recall Elections Blog bounced into existence. I whiffed on starting a website, and of course I was about five years too late to the blogging revolution, but it sounds like I got the timing right (normally, I'm off by about a century or two).
We're now on the cusp of a second gubernatorial recall. We've covered 18 of the 39 state legislative recalls in US history, the first judicial recall in the US since 1982, and close to a thousand recall elections (and over 150 resignations). Clearly, the recall is out of its Bermuda Triangle and once again having its moment.
I've been asked why I've focused on the recall, and well (might as well get some bragging in) in the last 10 years, I've written 213 op-eds on subjects far and wide, among them: the Electoral College, Voter Turnout; Third Parties; The Return to the 1880s; the Growth of the VP; One-Termers; Presidential and VP Selection; Conventions; So, so many articles against Iowa and New Hampshire; Gerrymandering; Congressional Leadership changes; Presidential communications; the folly of our Presidential succession system; The "First Round Draft Picks of American Politics"; NY's return to power, it's toxic judicial selection methods and the challenge of us electing natural born hayseeds as Mayor; why Joe Biden would be likely to get the Democratic nomination (not my headline); how my actual job is like a magic show and (most meaningfully) my grandfather's WWII experience and the Counted Remnant.
But of course, the recall has been a focus -- many articles have been on the recall (so far, I've written pieces in 38 states and 5 continents -- anyone got a connection to the Antarctica Herald-Tribune?). Perhaps the most unusual of these involved my historical research on Wisconsin's recall, leading to a story about Harry Houdini's Tefillin. And yet, once again, why the recall? I think I've explained it in a number of outlets how the recall shows the growth in more democratic procedures in government (for good or ill) and the success of the delegate/advocate/representative model of elected government. It also allows us to examine how technological changes impact the process and how voter anger works in practice. But, perhaps as important, I do think it may tell us a bit more about the political process and where we are going than observers realize. The death of local newspapers -- and the unfortunate sole focus on national issues to the detriment of local ones -- has led commentators to miss out on some of the biggest changes that have shaken the political world. The recall is one window into this.
I do want to thank the readers and the many journalists, academics and fellow bloggers who have supported this endeavor over the years. Some names to note (and sorry for whoever I've left off), starting with arguably the biggest inspiration to starting the blog -- Election Law Blogger Rick Hasen; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Craig Gilbert, Daily Kos' David Nir, PoliticalWire's Taegan Goddard, History News Network's Rick Shenkman, Ballot Access News' Richard Winger, Volokh Conspiracy's Eugene Volokh and LA Times' Mark Barabak. In the Wisconsin recalls, The Guardian's Richard Adams nicely nominated me for a proposed "wonk of the wonk awards" and then Politico's (now NYT, but forever Room8) Ben Smith ranked me among the "everything on the internet" and Chicago Magazine listed me as a Recall Junkie. So those were all fun.
Did I plan for it to last this long? Well, if you're starting a blog on Recall Elections, long-term planning is probably not going to be your thing. What can we expect in the future? More Simpsons jokes, more Dylan/The Hold Steady/Springsteen/Neil Young references? Obviously. More money? Kinda of doubting that one. More people calling me crazy for spending time on this? Undoubtedly. But certainly a lot more disappointed officeholders.
No signatures were handed in for the recall of Snohmish County Sheriff Adam Fortney. Previously, Snohomish County Auditor Garth Fell rejected a petition to give recall proponents 90 more days to gather signatures. Fell noted that he doesn't have the power and it is up to the Governor or courts. The Fortney recall was approved by the Washington State Supreme Court.
The recall was over his Facebook comments against the Governor's coronavirus pandemic restrictions, as well as hiring officers previously fired for misconduct. (there's also a recall effort over his handling of the jails during the pandemic). Fortney claimed that he "will not be enforcing an order preventing religious freedoms or constitutional rights." Petitioners had 180 days to gather 44,494 signatures.
The 6-3 Supreme Court vote accepted three of four charges, tossing out one that he failed to investigate the use of force by an officer. The three members who dissented upheld the recall effort over hiring officers for misconduct. They dissented over whether Fortney could face a recall over inciting people to ignore pandemic restrictions in his Facebook comments.
Petitions have been approved for the recall effort against San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin over complaints over lenient treatment of criminals. Recall efforts kicked into high gear after a convict who was arrested on suspicion of driving a stolen vehicle and violating probation was released without bail and then ran over two women while running a red light. Boudin had previously served as McAlister's defense attorney when he was a deputy public defender.
The stories say 51,000 signatures are needed, but the numbers seemed to be a little higher when I looked. It should be 10 percent of registered voters, which should equal 52,1988 valid signatures, though perhaps there was a drop-off in registered voters.
I have a bit more to say on District Attorney recalls (note there are ongoing efforts in Los Angeles and Sonoma County), but I'm waiting to see if I can place my op-ed on the subject.
Petitions seems to have been turned in against Councilwoman Sandra Breymaier (D), with the complaint of unprofessionalism, name-calling against the mayor and a vote in favor of smart meters. Breymaier claiming that Mayor Ken Kline (R) is behind the recall effort. Breymaier notes that she is a swing vote on the Council. Kline denies he is behind the recall effort. Petitions have 211 signatures (not certain from the article how much is needed. The number is 51% of the turnout).
Newton Falls has an interesting history with the recall.
Plummer Mayor Bill Weems survived a recall vote 71-66 against him, but recall supporters needed the total vote to top the amount he received in his initial election (78 votes) -- I'm now calling this a "Queen of the Hill" provision.
The recall seems to be about his behavior in off, and this state investigation may have something to do with it, though the articles aren't clear about the precipitating factors.
Idaho Falls School Board Trustee Elizabeth Cogliati survived a recall vote, 183-272. The issue was the hybrid alternate day schedule the board adopted by a 3-2 vote in order to combat the spread of the coronavirus pandemic. The vote followed widespread social distancing guidelines. Because of Idaho's recall law (requiring the vote against the official to top the amount needed to elect them to the position), the recall would have failed unless 221 people voted for removal.
Signatures were also handed in for the recall against Chairwoman Lara Hill, though the didn't meet the requirement. Petitioners needed 481 valid signatures for Hill and 280 for Cogliati.
There was also an attempt against Trustee Hillary Radcliffe, but because she was appointed to the position, the signature total needed was over 1400, so it seems to have failed.
One of the leaders of the recall effort is State Representative Bryan Zollinger (R), who apparently wanted students in school four days a week. Zollinger had supported Hill in her campaign.
