Opinion ID: 1837713
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sufficiency of circulators' affidavit.

Text: Sec. 9.10 (2) (a), Stats., provides that: . . . The preparation and form of the recall petition shall be governed by s. 8.15. In addition, a recall petition for a city office shall contain a specific statement of good and sufficient reason upon which removal is sought. Sec. 8.15, Stats., concerns the circulation of nomination papers for the September primary election and sub. (4) (a) thereof provides as follows: (4) (a) The affidavit of a qualified elector stating his residence with street and number, if any, shall appear at the bottom of each nomination paper, stating he is personally acquainted with all the signers; he knows they are electors of the ward, aldermanic district, municipality or county, as the nomination papers require; he knows they signed the paper with full knowledge of its content; he knows their respective residences given; he knows each signer signed on the date stated opposite his name; and, that he, the affiant, resides within the district which the candidate named therein will represent, if elected, and that he intends to support the candidate. The affidavit may be made by the candidate or any qualified elector. (Emphasis supplied.) The affidavits of the circulators in the instant case averred, . . . knows of their respective residents given ... The statute provides, . . . knows their respective residences given; . . . The appellant urges that the affidavit did not comply with the statutory provisions and is, therefore, fatally defective. We do not agree. The intent of the affiants is clear. Title II of the statutes concerns elections and sec. 5.01, Stats., provides as follows: Scope. (1) CONSTRUCTION OF TITLE II. Title II shall give effect to the will of the electors, if that can be ascertained from the proceedings, notwithstanding informality or failure to fully comply with some of its provisions. Nonetheless, it is clear from State ex rel. Baxter v. Beckley (1927), 192 Wis. 367, 370, 212 N. W. 792, that petitions for recall of municipal officials will receive close judicial scrutiny for procedural regularity as evidenced by the following language: While, as appellant stresses, by sub. (6), sec. 5.01, Stats., the legislative purpose is declared to be that the provisions of the election laws shall be construed so as to give effect to the will of the electors if that can be ascertained from the proceedings notwithstanding informality or failure to comply with some of its provisions, yet we are dealing here with a special election matter in which the rights of one theretofore duly elected to public office as well as the rights of the general public are concerned. Nor are we at liberty to disregard positive language of the statute as to what shall appear on the face of such a petition before the machinery to provide for a special recall election shall be set in motion. It is generally recognized in 4 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations (1968 rev. 3d ed.), pp. 313, 314, secs. 12.251a and 12.251b, as follows: There must be substantial compliance with legally required recall procedures. But substantial compliance is all that is necessary. Nevertheless, it has been ruled that noncompliance with a statutory provision intended to safeguard the operation of constitutional recall procedures is fatal to the validity of a recall petition. Sec. 12.251b.Petition. What a recall petition must contain, and the method of the determination of its sufficiency is to be tested, of course, by the meaning of the applicable local law, and such local laws vary in many respects. The petition should be liberally construed. . . . It is also recognized in 62 C. J. S., Municipal Corporations, pp. 958, 959, sec. 516: ... A statute providing for recall should be liberally construed with a view to promote the purpose for which it was enacted . . . . Under the facts of this case, we do not place any significance on the fact that the affidavit of the circulator used the word residents instead of the word residences, as used in the statute. The language of the affidavit contains a positive statement that the circulator knew each of the signers of the petition and that they were electors of the city of Montreal. We hold that there is no material significant defect in the petitions and that there has been substantial compliance with the statute. By the Court. Order affirmed.