Challenge needed to check petitions

Talk about it

It appears Mitchell voters will have their say on a proposal to convert dozens of city-owned acres to park land.

Unless someone challenges petitions submitted Monday to City Hall and can prove several dozen signatures are not those of registered voters in the city, the issue, simmering in town for months, will go to a vote Nov. 2.

The land-use petition has 550 signatures, exceeding the required 483 names needed, according to Finance Officer Marilyn Wilson. The city is not required to ensure the signatures are those of registered voters, although it does check to ensure names and signatures match as well as other details.

“I don’t have to check for registration,” Wilson said. “The circulator is supposed to verify that they’re registered voters in Mitchell when the person signs the petition.”

Mike Kuchera and Bob Porter were the chief petitioners.

Porter, who described himself as “just another voter in Mitchell,” said Tuesday he didn’t want to discuss what efforts were made to ensure only registered voters signed the petition.

“I don’t want to go deep into anything,” he said. “I just want voters to decide. Let the people of Mitchell vote on it.”

Three city-owned sections are mentioned in the petition. They are:

• A wooded lot of nine-plus acres in a north-south strip along North Harmon Drive that has its northwestern tip at the corner of North Harmon and National Guard Road;

• A 55-acre section of land at the west end of the lake, on the lake’s south side;

• And all city-owned land that abuts the lake.

City staff is studying the areas to determine exactly how much land is involved.

Election Supervisor Kea Warne of the South Dakota Secretary of State’s Office said under state law, only petitions for school board candidates and statewide ballot questions are checked to assure

contain enough valid signatures.

Government bodies can write laws imposing tougher rules, Warne said, “but that’s a choice of that municipality or the school.”

Still, signatures can be checked if someone challenges the petition, Warne said. They must submit a signed, notarized affidavit citing “specific deficiencies” in the petition, such as false names or signers who are not registered voters, she said.

The challenge must be filed at the office where the petitions are turned in, Warne said, and the election supervisor would then be tasked with checking all the signatures.

A challenge can be filed after the petition has been certified by the government where it was submitted. The land petition was not certified as of Tuesday but should be today or Thursday, Wilson said.

The challenge can be filed for five days after the petition is approved, Warne said. Legal steps can be taken after that deadline passes, she said.

“After five days has passed, anyone can challenge it in court,” Warne said.

While challenging election petitions is rare, she said, it does happen.

The 2009 statewide smoking ban ballot measure was challenged and removed from the ballot because not enough of the signatures on it were valid, Warne said.

“That was the first time we’ve ever seen the challenge used on a statewide issue,” Warne said. “Normally, we see it done on local issues.”

There were also some challenges this year for legislative candidates, she said.

The issue of valid names on a petition was raised earlier this year in Mitchell. A petition with more than 1,000 signatures asking the city not to trade land near the lake as part of a development deal was submitted. It did not seek a vote on the issue.

At the time, Mayor Lou Sebert said 81 signatures were invalid. Finding that many invalid signatures on the more recent petition would drop the effort below the total needed to place the issue on the ballot.

Sebert said Tuesday he does not plan to challenge the new petition. “No, probably not,” Sebert said.

He said he had “scanned” the petition and noticed that most of the addresses seemed to be Mitchell ones. Sebert said it looks like the issue will go to the voters.

Tags: news, local, park