Michigan House Bill HB4359

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/22/25
• Refer: 4/22/25
• Report Pass: 7/15/25
• Engrossed: 9/3/25

Caption

Elections: local; term of office for elected officials; modify. Amends secs. 4, 5 & 13, ch. II & sec. 3, ch. V of 1895 PA 3 (MCL 62.4 et seq.).

Impact

The potential impact of HB 4359 on state laws revolves around its emphasis on standardizing the electoral processes within Michigan's villages. By determining clear terms for elected officials and outlining procedures for filling vacancies, the bill seeks to enhance local governance efficiency and consistency. Existing legislative frameworks will be updated to reflect these changes, which may encourage greater civic engagement and streamline local election practices. However, the shift in term lengths may raise discussions about the balance of power within village councils and their responsiveness to community needs.

Summary

House Bill 4359 proposes amendments to the 1895 PA 3, also known as 'The General Law Village Act'. The bill aims to modify the terms of office for elected officials in villages, specifically addressing the duration of terms and the processes for filling vacancies. Under the proposed amendments, the president, clerk, and treasurer of a village would serve a term of two years. Additionally, the legislation prescribes that village trustees must be elected at each biennial election for either a four-year term or a two-year term, as determined by local ordinance. The bill also includes provisions for the appointment of interim officials to fill vacancies until the next regular election.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 4359 appears to be generally supportive, particularly among local governance advocates who see the need for clearer regulations pertaining to village elections and governance. Supporters believe that the amendments will empower villages by providing straightforward regulations. However, there may also be concerns about whether the two-year term for village executives is optimal for stable and effective governance, with some questioning the adequacy of duration in ensuring continuity and accountability in local affairs.

Contention

Notable points of contention may emerge around the appropriateness of the proposed term lengths and the mechanisms for filling vacancies. While some stakeholders support the amendments for fostering a more organized electoral process, others may argue that frequent elections could detract from long-term planning and accountability. Furthermore, the definition of how vacancies are filled—particularly under circumstances of reduced council membership—may generate debate concerning local control versus state oversight.