Supporters of referendum petition challenging city’s equal rights ordinance filed petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel city council to either repeal the ordinance or submit it to popular vote.
The Supreme Court of Texas held that:
- City secretary certified that petition had a sufficient number of signatures, and thus city council had a ministerial duty to reconsider ordinance and either repeal it or submit it to popular vote;
- Supporters of petition did not have an adequate remedy by way of appeal; and
- Supporters of petition could seek mandamus relief in an original proceeding in the Supreme Court.
City secretary certified that referendum petition challenging city’s equal rights ordinance had a sufficient number of signatures, and thus city council had a ministerial duty under city’s charter to reconsider the ordinance and either repeal it or submit it to popular vote, even though secretary also noted city attorney’s finding that there were an insufficient number of signatures due to the invalidity of many signature pages. Secretary unequivocally stated that she was “able to certify” that the number of signatures verified on the petition was more than required, and secretary did not adopt or certify city attorney’s finding.
City council could not refuse to reconsider equal rights ordinance that was challenged in referendum petition that city secretary certified as having a sufficient number of signatures, despite city council’s alleged concern that petition was tainted by forgery and perjury. City charter gave city council no discretion to reevaluate the petition once it was certified by city secretary, but rather required immediate action.
Supporters of referendum petition challenging city’s equal rights ordinance did not have an adequate remedy by way of appeal for city council’s failure to perform its ministerial duty after certification of the petition by the city secretary to either repeal the ordinance or submit it to popular vote, and thus supporters were entitled to mandamus relief. Appellate process would not resolve the case in time for referendum to be placed on next general election ballot.
Supporters of referendum petition challenging city’s equal rights ordinance, who sought to compel city council to perform its ministerial duty after petition was certified by the city secretary to either repeal the ordinance or submit it to popular vote, could seek mandamus relief in an original proceeding in the Supreme Court, despite contention that petition should have been filed in District Court. Election Code expressly authorized Supreme Court or a Court of Appeals to “issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of any duty imposed by law in connection with the holding of an election.”