Howell Public Schools recall, Michigan (2015)

• Recall efforts
  • Recall efforts by state
  • Recall efforts by office
  • Recall efforts by year
  • Upcoming recall elections
• Local recalls
  • City council recalls
  • Mayoral recalls
  • County commission recalls
  • County official recalls
  • School board recalls
  • Sheriff recalls
  • Special district recalls
• State and federal recalls
  • State executive recalls
  • State legislator recalls
  • U.S. Congress recalls
• Laws governing recall
  • States that have pre-petition signature requirements for recalls
  • States that require grounds for recalls
• Analysis
  • What are recalls?
  • Recall terms
  • 2024 mid-year analysis
  • 2023 year-end analysis
  • 2023 mid-year analysis
  • 2022 year-end analysis
  • 2022 mid-year analysis
  • 2021 year-end analysis
  • 2021 mid-year analysis
  • 2020 year-end analysis
  • 2020 mid-year analysis
  • 2019 year-end analysis
  • 2019 mid-year analysis
  • 2018 year-end analysis
  • 2018 mid-year analysis
  • 2017 year-end analysis
  • 2017 mid-year analysis
  • 2016 year-end analysis
  • 2016 mid-year analysis

Howell Public Schools Board of Education recall
Officeholders
Deborah McCormick Michael Moloney Mike Yenshaw
Recall status
Did not go to a vote Resigned
See also
Recall overview Political recall efforts, 2015 Recalls in Michigan Michigan recall laws School board recalls Recall reports

An effort to recall Deborah McCormick, Michael Moloney and Mike Yenshaw from the Howell Public Schools Board of Education in Michigan began in November 2014 and ended in July 2015. The Howell Recall Committee was formed by local businessman Don Cortez and others following the board's decision to fire Superintendent Ron Wilson. Wilson and the other supporters of the recall decided to suspend their efforts, effective July 31, 2015, following the resignation of Michael Moloney from the board on June 22, 2015.

While he did not state the recall effort against him in his reasons for leaving, recall supporters said that their pressure upon Moloney was at least in part responsible for his decision. Recall supporters cited his resignation, which necessitated the appointment of a new board member, and a new superintendent in their decision to suspend their campaign. As recall committee co-chair Matt Ikle stated, “With Mr. Moloney gone and the current board together and a new superintendent, we hope that it is going off in a positive direction at this point."

See also: Path to the ballot

Recall supporters

Arguments for recall

The school board stated that it fired Ron Wilson, who was the district's superintendent, over mileage requests, a failure to communicate a potential consulting opportunity with a contractor and a failure to return a district laptop by a deadline. Additionally, board member Mike Moloney argued that the mileage dispute was the last point in a series of issues with Wilson's performance. He pointed to concerns about student performance and budget management as being other areas of contention with Wilson. The board also cited Wilson's connection to Eidex as part of the reason for his dismissal. The district had purchased education data analysis software from Eidex. Recall proponents, however, argued that only the mileage issue was brought up at the meeting when Wilson was fired.

Members of the board argued that Wilson was not entitled to a mileage reimbursement because he received a car stipend, but Wilson contended that he was owed the mileage for out-of-district travel expenses. He also disputed the board's other claims stating that there was no consulting opportunity with Eidex and that he returned the laptop but had been unaware of a specific return date he was supposed to meet. In December 2014, Wilson filed a lawsuit against the school district over his firing in Livingston County Circuit Court.

The second attempt at recall petition language, which was rejected on factual grounds, alleged that the board members authorized spending $5,000 to investigate the mileage reimbursements Wilson sought.

Editorial support

The Livingston Daily editorial board wrote in favor of the recall on April 11, 2015. They argued that because the recall process would replace any ousted board members in the same election, it would effectively be moving the election up one year and allow the district to move on more rapidly from the issues with Wilson. They said:

“	The recall, if it proceeds, will move up the school board election one year and give voters a chance to pick the next leaders of this district. We believe this would be a good step and put this contentious issue behind a district that has been changing superintendents like some people change cars, every couple of years. ... And if certain board members are so worried about Howell’s reputation and trying to keep things going smoothly, they should have thought about that in November when they decided to fire Wilson. We have been scratching our heads and have practically gone bald trying to figure out how things spun so far out of control. School board trustees who voted to fire Wilson said it became a trust issue and the $309 in unauthorized mileage payments was only part of it. However, the bottom line is they fired Wilson over $309 in mileage payments. It’s baffling , and it doesn’t make sense. Even if certain board members had butted heads with Wilson, they should have come together and recognized firing him was not the smart thing to do. They could have brought everyone into one room, spoken their views and agreed to move on. But no, this issue turned into an ongoing dispute, and no one seemed to grasp the bigger picture. We believe a recall and moving up the school board election up one year will put the focus back on students and bring a healthy dose of common sense.	”
—Livingston Daily editorial board (2015)

Recall opponents

Arguments against recall

Michael Moloney's resignation

Moloney's announcement of his resignation came without any reference to the recall effort against him. However, in his resignation letter, he outlined a number of items he perceived as important achievements for the district during his tenure on the board. His full letter may be read here.

Recall supporters end effort after board and superintendent changes

Recall supporters cited Moloney's resignation and the hiring of Erin MacGregor as the new superintendent as reasons to end their recall effort against Yenshaw and McCormick. They also stated the community feedback played into their decision. Recall co-chair Ikle said, "With the resignation of former Trustee Mike Moloney and the new superintendent in place, we felt it was best to move forward without a recall. We reached out to the community and got feedback that contributed to this decision, as well."

The recall committee issued the following press release outlining their reasons for ending the recall effort:

“	The Howell Recall Committee would like to announce the suspension of the recall of Howell School Board members Michael Yenshaw and Deborah McCormick effective July 31, 2015. The Committee was formed to address the ongoing leadership issues that plagued our district and possibly will result in large liability costs that will fall on the backs of the parents and taxpayers. The recent resignation of Mr. Maloney had our committee pause to reevaluate the Community desires. With input from many parents and other Community leaders we have decided to take a wait and see approach. Our Community desires and deserves high functioning leaders, teachers and administrative staff that have our district and our students at the center of their focus. We are called as parents and leaders to hold each other accountable to a high level of respect and gratitude as we navigate issues as a Community. It is the belief of this group that disingenuous decisions and tactics were used and are continuing to be used today to retaliate and divide. Decisions made at a board level need to be based on policy, financial and student focused, not politically motivated with micromanaging. Our attempt to bring a new culture of leadership to our district is underway and needs all of us to help each other, fight for respect and support for the staff that educates our children. We welcome our new Superintendent Erin J. MacGregor, Ed.S. to the community and will support him in every effort to achieve our school districts goals. We will continue to watch closely that the current board will allow Mr. MacGregor to perform his job and move our district forward in a positive direction. A Huge THANK YOU all the Parents, Teachers, Community Leaders and Concerned Citizens that came forward during the Recall process that became involved and supported the effort for new leadership.	”
—Howell Recall Committee (July 15, 2015)

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing recall in Michigan

The committee initially sought to recall board member Stacey Pasini, as well. Supporters filed new petition language on December 10, 2014, after their initial petition language was rejected by the Livingston County Elections Commission for being too vague. The new submission narrowed the recall targets to McCormick, Moloney and Yenshaw. The Livingston County Elections Commission composed of County Probate Judge Miriam Cavanaugh, Clerk Margaret Dunleavy and Treasurer Jennifer Nash had 10 to 20 days following the filing to hold a hearing to determine whether or not the new language would be approved.

The second wording was approved by the commission on December 22, 2014. Yenshaw and Moloney filed an appeal to challenge the factuality of the recall petition's allegations, which prevented recall supporters from circulating it for signatures. As the signature submission deadline was January 30, 2015, the proponents filed an emergency appeal to hold the hearing of the appeal sooner.

Livingston County Circuit Court Judge Michael P. Hatty rejected the second recall petition on factual grounds in January 2015. Justice Hatty ruled that the wording was misleading to voters as it indicated that Yenshaw and Moloney authorized spending money to investigate Wilson without making clear that the authorization was part of a board vote and not an action taken by the recall targets alone.

On February 5, 2015, a third version of the petition was approved by the county election commission. Recall targets had 10 days to protest the new petition language but did not choose to do so. The signature gathering deadline was July 31, 2015.

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms 'Howell Public Schools' recall. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Howell Public Schools recall, Michigan (2015) - Google News

See also

• Howell Public Schools, Michigan
• Recall campaigns in Michigan
• Political recall efforts, 2015
• School board recalls

External links

Suggest a link

• Howell Public Schools
• Howell Recall Committee

Additional reading

• The Livingston Daily, "Committee suspends recall effort," July 15, 2015
• Howell Recall Committee, "Press Release," July 15, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Howell recall committee to meet after Balloonfest," June 26, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "District’s past, future surround Howell recall," March 6, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Rhetoric heats as Howell recall gears up," February 18, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "No appeal filed, Howell recall plans to proceed," February 16, 2015
• WHMI, "School Board Expects Challenges In Superintendent Search," February 11, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Recall right protected by state constitution," February 7, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Revised Howell recall wording approved," February 5, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Howell Public Schools tightens email practice," January 29, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Howell schools to begin superintendent search," January 28, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Judge strikes down Howell recall petitions," January 15, 2015
• Livingtston Daily, "Recall boosters’ email raises concerns," January 13, 2015
• WLNS.com, "Howell School Board Recall Moves To Emergency Hearing," January 7, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Howell Schools recall drive looming," November 18, 2014
• Livingston Daily, "School board's motives, intent questioned," November 17, 2014

Editorials & letters to the editor

• Livingston Daily, "Letter: It is time for public to support school board," February 18, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Michael Yenshaw: Not our fault recallers lacked ability to craft wording," February 16, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Editorial: Recall right protected by state constitution," February 7, 2015
• Livingston Daily, "Mike Moloney: Board is there to make tough choices," November 17, 2014