After conducting research on 35 court elections across the state, I can tell you that the tone of local politics in Michigan varies greatly, from sleepy to slash-and-burn.
For example, I can tell you all about the three candidates from Paw Paw running for district judge in Van Buren County, in part because those three small-town lawyers are making more of a campaign effort than some of the candidates in Detroit running in the 36th District, Michigan’s largest.
In tiny Lake County (pop. 11,000) north of Muskegon, the hottest race is not a judicial contest but a four-way battle for sheriff. That primary election has prompted a complaint filed with Attorney General Bill Schuette that raises an interesting legal issue.
Candidate Harold Nichols is accused of violating Michigan election law by erecting campaign signs and billboards that simply say, “Harold Nichols Sheriff,” which can give voters the false impression that he is the incumbent. But when he began altering the signs so that they said “Harold Nichols for Sheriff,” the complainant argued that Nichols was tampering with evidence before Schuette had decided whether to take any action.
The man who filed the complaint, Lake County Commissioner Dan Sloan, put Nichols in a box. Fix the signs and you are tampering, if not admitting guilt; leave them as is and you’re thumbing your nose at the law.
In his written complaint to Schuette, Sloan noted that Nichols is a police detective (with 20 years of experience at the Lake County Sheriff’s Department) who claims in his campaign that he will bring a “higher standard” of law enforcement to the county.
These types of complaints, related to candidates falsely implying incumbency, arise every election year. But they are typically filed with the Secretary of State’s Office as an alleged violation of the state Campaign Finance Act. The SOS Bureau of Elections places an emphasis on remedies rather than strict enforcement. If a candidate agrees to fix the signs, that is exactly what the Elections Bureau hopes to achieve.
But Sloan’s complaint was filed with the AG as a criminal matter, a violation of state election law. That law clearly states that a candidate cannot engage in a misrepresentation which could make the public believe that he or she is an incumbent.
Sloan, a political consultant, backs a Nichols’ election opponent who can carry the banner of incumbent – former Undersheriff Dennis Robinson who was appointed sheriff last year.
With a bit of a snarky tone, Sloan suggests that the photos of Nichols’ campaign signs which he supplied to Schuette cannot serve as evidence with as much impact as an inspection of the real thing. In this age of Photoshop and other easy forms of digital alteration, a picture is not foolproof.
So, the argument goes, alterations should not be allowed. The complaint also refers to Nichols’ fliers, website and Facebook page. Are screenshots acceptable evidence in this case? The website still features a logo that says “Nichols Sheriff.” Why wasn’t that fixed? Would that be tampering?
Initially, Sloan filed a complaint with Lake County Prosecutor Craig Cooper, who declined to pursue the matter, saying it’s not apparent that Nichols was familiar with the law (despite his many years in law enforcement). Now, it’s unclear what action Schuette will take, if any.
Who knows where this goes? Perhaps little Lake County will set a legal precedent for the rest of the state.
