8.7.24 Petoskey News Review - Harbor Springs declares referendum petition 'defective,' puts issue on the ballot anyway.

— Contact reporter Karly Graham atkgraham@petoskeynews.com. Follow her on Twitter at@KarlyGrahamJRN. HARBOR SPRINGS — The City of Harbor Springs deemed a petition to put a referendum on the November ballot defective, despite having more than the necessary number of signatures needed. A group of citizens worked to collect signatures to have a referendum, which aims to have Ordinance 439 repealed. Ordinance 439 covers the zoning code, which was approved unanimously by the council during their May 20 meeting. The zoning code included a large overhaul, reducing the number of districts in the city and allowing for the zoning administrator to have more approval power, instead of requiring minor changes to go through the zoning board, for example. More:Harbor Springs passed a new zoning code. Residents are working on a referendum to pause it A total of 348 valid signatures were collected for the referendum, but because the submitted petition was not delivered and addressed to city council, the city denied the petition. The city charter requires valid signatures from 25% of registered voters in the city. Representatives from We Love Harbor Springs, the group collecting signatures, previously told the News-Review around 302 signatures would be necessary to get the item on the ballot. "The petition is valid as far as signatures go," Harbor Springs Clerk Nick Whitaker said during Monday's city council meeting. "The city attorney looked at the actual language on the petition, and it ended up that didn't meet the requirements of the charter." Section 7.10 of the Harbor Springs City Charter, which covers referendums and citizen petitions, states: "Any such petition shall be addressed to the council." “This is very unfortunate and there’s a lot of work I know you guys have put into it but I can’t … go against what the law says,” Whitaker said. “I wouldn’t be doing my job.” The cover letter of the petition, which was submitted by Mark Wagoner, was addressed to all members of city council, and the start of the letter reads, "Dear Members of the City of Harbor Springs City Council," according to agenda materials. The council members received a legal opinion that they considered during closed session. After the closed session, they decided to confirm the attorney's opinion to deny the petition. However, the council voted 4-1, with Nancy Rondell serving as the only no, to put the issue to repeal the ordinance on the November ballot anyways. Prior to both votes, which included the council denying the petition and then approving the ballot, council member Michael Behrmann spoke in support of the work that had been done by the planning commission, as well as the changes that had been made. "A group came and I think in some bases, for a lack of better word, bullied, harassed and put out misinformation," he said. "Having said that, I also recognize that 348 voters signed a petition with the intent of repealing the zoning code. "We live in a democracy, and as much as this pains me to put this on the ballot, I think it's the right decision," he added. "It's not a decision that I like because I truly support our very hard working residents on planning commission and my colleagues on council, but I think sometimes in a democracy, you make decisions that, personally, you don't agree with, because we live in the United States." Prior to the council entering closed session, multiple residents asked about how to get the approval for the petition. City attorney Jim Ramer said the petition would need to be redone, including the recollection of signatures. One person who spoke during public comment said the council had the opportunity to put something on the ballot themselves. City manager Victor Sinadinoski told the News-Review the city charter does not have explicit language allowing council to put an item on the ballot, but the charter does have an inclusion about "implied powers" and the council has previously put an item on the ballot themselves, and this could be considered something within implied powers. — Contact reporter Karly Graham atkgraham@petoskeynews.com. Follow her on Twitter at@KarlyGrahamJRN. https://www.petoskeynews.com/story/news/local/2024/08/07/harbor-springs-denies-referendum-puts-ordinance-on-ballot-anyway/74681643007/?utm_source=petoskey-news-review-daily-briefing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailybriefing&utm_term=hero&utm_content=npnr-petoskey-nletter65 A response on the Petoskey News Review to the story for more context from a reader: J.R. Elliot "Of course democracy should triumph. Petition was not defective. Language in the city charter IS defective aka: Arbitrary or Capricious. The arbitrary-or-capricious test is a legal standard of review used by judges to assess the actions of administrative agencies. It was originally defined in a provision of the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which instructs courts reviewing agency actions to invalidate any that they find to be "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law." The test is most frequently employed to assess the factual basis of an agency's rulemaking, especially informal rulemakings. Stay tuned." Disappointing were the words of council member Michael Behrmann, especially. When asked about his choice of accusations about the We Love Harbor Springs group, he spoke of how he had not been given an opportunity for the canvassers to come to his house. It was explained that it was a courtesy, thought out well in advance, not to bother the officials at their homes. They, we knew, had voted to approve the zoning. What else was left to say, then? So let's stay tuned to see what happens when ordinary citizens try to present a referendum to our city. When the City Clerk explained he said, - "I wouldn't be doing my job. Okay, so maybe we can have some more clarity about it later or something." We hope to have more clarity very soon.