EDITORIAL: Eager to Interpret the Law, But Unclear on Following it

SEVERAL OF THE the eight candidates running for two seats on the Washtenaw County Trial Court have their campaign yard signs planted on public property. The signs appear on public property throughout Ann Arbor, including one at the Traverwood branch of the Ann Arbor District Library (subsequently removed) and on tree extensions along major roads. More than one judicial candidate website is missing the required “paid for” disclaimer. Ignorance of the law has landed many a hapless defendant in hot water, a fact of which all of these candidates for the bench are, no doubt, well aware.

Gov. Snyder’s newly-appointed Probate Judge Julia B. Owdziej will have 60 days on the bench before seeking re-election as an incumbent. In obvious eagerness to make political hay with her pre-election appointment, the gubernatorial appointee’s campaign signs—which urge voters to “retain” Judge Owdziej—are planted in violation of city ordinance all over Ann Arbor.

We believe a sitting judge who flaunts local ordinance while campaigning owes the public an explanation.

That Judge Owdziej is not alone in having campaign signs illegally planted speaks more to the inexperience of the local candidates for the bench than it does, we think, to any concerted effort to take advantage of Ann Arbor’s Community Standards staff. Be that as it may, placing campaign signs on public land allows a candidate to avoid the task of going door-to-door to ask homeowners/property owners to give their support and to display campaign signs.

With just about four weeks until the August 5 primary election, we urge the Washtenaw County Trial Court probate and circuit court candidates to read up on the ordinances regarding the placement of campaign yard signs and to remove all those which have been illegally planted and are subject to complaint and confiscation by Community Standards officials. Doing so would demonstrate that the candidates are prepared to take responsibility for their mistakes, themselves and their campaigns. Removing the signs from public property would show respect for the political process, local law and fair play—qualities we believe a judicial candidate should have.

As for the judicial candidates whose websites are missing “paid for” disclaimers, this is, frankly, a more serious problem;  it is not a requirement of a local ordinance; it is a requirement of Michigan campaign finance law. While we wouldn’t expect state officials to prosecute any of the Washtenaw Trial Court candidates for neglecting to use a “paid for” disclaimer on a campaign website or Facebook page, it would be embarrassing for any elected judge to be cited for campaign finance violations.

Again, we do not believe these mistakes are the result of efforts to conceal who is paying for the candidates’ websites and/or Facebook page upkeep and design. However, it’s obviously unacceptable for judicial candidates to neglect to adhere to state campaign finance rules.

We are heartened by the number of candidates running for probate and trial court. Voters owe it to our community and these candidates to make informed decisions. Candidates’ campaigns owe it to the public to follow the rules.