Richard Ranzau recall, Sedgwick County Commission, Kansas (2016)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Sedgwick County Commission recall
Screenshot 2015-11-21 at 10.39.30 PM.png
Officeholders
Richard Ranzou
Recall status
Did not go to a vote
See also
Recall overview
Political recall efforts, 2016
Recalls in Kansas
Kansas recall laws
County commission recalls
Recall reports

An effort in Sedgwick County, Kansas, to recall Richard Ranzau from his position as the chair of the county board of commissioners was officially launched on November 17, 2015. The first petition filed by Ranzau's critics was rejected as invalid by the district attorney, who said the petitioners failed to give sufficient grounds for a recall. A second petition was filed on December 8, 2015. This petition was also denied.[1][2][3][4]

Petitioners filed a lawsuit in the Kansas Supreme Court seeking an overruling of the district attorney's decision.[5] On March 30, 2016, the supreme court sent the case back to the Sedgwick County District Court.[6]

The Immigration Advocacy Network launched this recall as a response to Ranzau's position on illegal immigration and other issues. Specifically, the recall was proposed after:[7]

  • Ranzau voted along with the county commission majority to reduce funding for the Women, Infants and Children program (WIC);
  • Ranzau voted with the county commission minority to eliminate the positions of three part-time peer counselors for young mothers;
  • Ranzau sent a letter to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment requesting that the Women, Infants and Children program be restricted to “United States citizens, nationals and qualified aliens;” and
  • Ranzau voted with the county majority to cut about $500,000 from the 2016 county health department budget, leaving a budget of about $11 million.

Ranzau was elected to represent District 4, which includes Valley Center, Maize, Park City and sections of northern and central Wichita.[7]

When the first recall petition was rejected, petitioners refiled the petition, amending the grounds of the recall to focus on individual orders signed personally by Ranzau. Recall petitioners still contended that Ranzau failed to keep his oath of office and failed to provide for the well being of "inhabitants who by reason of age, infirmity or other misfortune may have claims upon the aid of society” as outlined in the Kansas Constitution. Mary Ware, a recall petitioner, said, “He signed orders refusing public health funds for the poor and for infants and children.” This second petition was also rejected by the DA.[3][4]

Background

Partially as a response to Ranzau's suggestion, county health department officials drafted a form that was designed to ask all applicants for aid from department facilities about their immigration status. A final draft was scheduled for completion by January 1, 2016. According to county officials, the health department provided services to 41,411 patients between October 2014 and October 2015. Supporters of the idea said that no one would be denied services based on the questionnaire. Critics said that it would certainly discourage many from seeking aid, even if they were in great need.[8]

Speaking of illegal immigrants, Commissioner Ranzau said, “I think they are using a lot of services, personally. But, in our own community in Sedgwick County, do we really know for sure unless we ask the question?” Commissioner Jim Howell, who also supported the idea of a questionnaire, said, "We’re simply collecting data. We’re not discriminating or even suggesting that we would limit resources or services to anybody based on the answer to this question. We would just like to understand who the population is. We’ll never know the answer if we don’t ask the question. There is nothing wrong with getting data. It’s possible we can collect the data and not even tie the answers back to the actual clients."[8]

Douglas Greenaway, president and CEO of the National Women, Infants and Children Association, said, “It absolutely will have negative consequences for people seeking health support for their families in need." Jenny Rejeske, a health policy analyst with the National Immigration Law Center, agreed, saying, “It creates these additional barriers, and immigrants are already reluctant and fearful to use services that are perceived to be government services. These kind of questions [sic] would only serve an anti-immigrant agenda and absolutely undermine public health."[8]

Michelle Ponce, executive director of the Kansas Association of Local Health Departments, focused on the benefits to the community at large of ensuring healthcare for all residents. Ponce said, “You would not want to put any kind of policy in place that would deter any individual from seeking that service." She provided a lack of vaccination as an example, arguing, “having pockets of unvaccinated individuals within a community increases risk of transmission of preventable diseases to everyone.”[8]

Commissioner Dave Unruh, who opposed the proposed form, argued that the county couldn't get accurate data with a questionnaire, making the risk of discouraging the use of county services far outweigh any benefit. Unruh said, “I don’t think we would get truthful answers out of the folks that it seems like the chairman is focused on. It would deter a lot of the people from seeking the services that we offer.” Djuan Wash, a spokesman for the progressive group Kansas People’s Action, claimed that discouraging illegal immigrants from using services provided by the county was, in fact, the purpose of the proposal. He said, “These families are already afraid to begin with. The goal is to make life so miserable for them that they self-deport.”[8]

Recall supporters

Sandrine Lisk, director of advocacy for the Immigration Advocacy Network, said, “Mr. Ranzau has failed in providing and protecting the health and welfare of Sedgwick County citizens who he was elected to protect. He’s got to go.”[7]

Recall petition sponsor Mary Ward said, “The straw that broke the camel’s back was turning back money that belongs to Women, Infants and Children program. Those are the most vulnerable of our citizens.”[9]

Recall supporter Tom James said, “We’ve seen the stuff that he’s done in the past, and I feel like he’s pushing the commission in a direction that’s not beneficial to all of us.” James also said, “He has deprived our county of valuable tax public health dollars, allowing that money to go elsewhere to people he does not work for. I think we should remove him now before he does any more damage.”[9]

Recall opponents

Response from Richard Ranzau

Ranzau said, “I have stated that citizens of this country should not be forced to subsidize illegal immigration and I stand by that. If they want to start a recall petition because of my position on this particular issue, then so be it.” Ranzau also said he believed most of his constituents in District 4 agreed with him on this issue.[1]

Ranzau also implied that none of the complaints provided by recall supporters amounted to the necessary grounds for a recall, saying, “They’re complaining about policy decisions. It’s our job to make decisions about spending and we do that all the time. Sometimes we spend more and sometimes we spend less. Sometimes we start programs, sometimes we end them.”<IntroLaunch/>

Path to the ballot

Petition

See also: Laws governing recall in Kansas

To successfully trigger a recall election for Richard Ranzau, petitioners needed to file a petition form stating the grounds for the recall with the district attorney. District Attorney Marc Bennett rejected the first recall petition targeting Richard Ranzau, saying it lacked sufficient grounds to justify a recall. Petitioners stated that they might appeal the DA's ruling. Ultimately, recall proponents refiled the petition against Ranzau, amending the proposed grounds for the recall effort to focus more on specific orders signed by Ranzau. The DA rejected the second petition language as well. If the DA had approved the new recall petition language, petitioners would have needed to collect 9,650 valid signatures from registered voters in District 4 within a 90-day window. This signature threshold amounted to 40 percent of the votes cast for District 4 candidates in the preceding commissioner election, as dictated by law.[7][9][2][3][4]

District Attorney Marc Bennett stated that it was very difficult to successfully put a recall before voters. Concerning the recall petition process, Bennett said, "You've got to make sure that the petition itself actually states a grounds upon which relief can be granted. Without both the form and the grounds for an actual recall it's hard to get a recall election through. A recall is really reserved for something egregious." It is Bennett's job to examine submitted recall petition forms and decide if the grounds provided are enough to justify a recall petition. He said that usually recalls are reserved as responses to crimes, misconduct or failure to perform prescribed duties and said that disagreeing with the position of an elected official does not constitute grounds for a recall.[10]

Supreme court case

Petitioners filed a lawsuit in the Kansas Supreme Court seeking an overruling of the district attorney's decision.[5] The supreme court issued a ruling on March 30, 2016, sending the case down to the Sedgwick County District Court. "We find adequate relief is available in the district court," read the decision.[6]

See also

External links

Recent news

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

Footnotes