Richards v. Schmidt

274 Kan. 753 (2002) · Supreme Court of Kansas · October 25, 2002

Summary

The Kansas Supreme Court considered whether the signature threshold for a local-official recall petition is calculated using the most recent general election before the petition is filed or the election preceding circulation of the petition. The court held that the relevant election is the general election for the office held before circulation of the recall petition, and it reversed and remanded with instructions to proceed with the recall election.

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas
Writing for the Court
Larson, J.; Larson, S.J., assigned
Jurisdiction
Kansas
Decision date
October 25, 2002
Procedural posture
Richards sought review of the Johnson County election officer's determination that his recall petition lacked the required number of signatures. The district court granted judgment for Schmidt, and Richards appealed.
Standard of review
Questions of statutory construction are subject to unlimited review by an appellate court.
Precedential value
Published precedential opinion of the Supreme Court of Kansas
Parties
Gary T. Richards v. Connie J. Schmidt, Johnson County election officer
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

recall electionselection lawstatutory interpretationlegislative intentin pari materia

Practice areas

election lawstatutory interpretationconstitutional lawmunicipal law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the phrase "the last general election" in K.S.A. 25-4325 refers to the general election preceding approval and commencement of circulation of the recall petition or to an intervening general election occurring before the completed petition is filed.

Holdings

  1. The phrase "the last general election" in K.S.A. 25-4325 refers to the general election for the office of the local official sought to be recalled that occurred before circulation of the recall petition, as established when the recall committee first submits the petition for approval. An intervening general election before filing the completed petition does not change the required number of signatures.

Key quotations

Where a state constitutional provision provides for tire recall of public officials, recall is viewed as a fundamental right which the people have reserved to themselves. When the power of recall is a fundamental right, statutes governing the exercise of the power are to be liberally construed in favor of the ability to exercise it, and any Kmitations on that power must be strictly construed. (at 758-759)
For the reasons stated above, we construe together all of the provisions of K.S.A. 25-4318 et seq. and hold that the term “the last general election” in K.S.A. 25-4325 refers only to the general election for the office of the local officer sought to be recalled held prior to the circulation of the recall petition. (at 760)

Factual background

Gary Glenn was elected to a Ward 4 council position in Merriam, Kansas, in April 1999, when 424 votes were cast for the office. Richards began a recall petition, and the recall grounds were approved on January 17, 2001, allowing 90 days to collect signatures. Before Richards filed the petition, an April 3, 2001, general election was held for the other Ward 4 council position, with 675 votes cast; Richards filed 181 signatures on April 16, 2001. The election officer deemed the petition insufficient because 40 percent of the intervening election's votes required 270 signatures.

Procedural history

Richards initiated a recall petition against Merriam, Kansas, city councilman Gary Glenn. After an intervening general election for the other council position in the same ward, Richards filed the petition with 181 signatures. The Johnson County election officer rejected it as requiring 270 signatures based on the intervening election. The district court upheld that determination on summary judgment. The Supreme Court of Kansas reversed and remanded with instructions to proceed with the recall election.

Remand instructions

The district court was instructed to order the Johnson County election officer to proceed with the recall election as statutorily provided.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…