Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 117 / Act 279 of 1909
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 117.25 (2026)

Initiatory petition; filing with city clerk; contents; verification; signatures and inscriptions; perjury and other felonies; punishment; canvass; certifying sufficiency or insufficiency of petition; causing proposed amendment to be submitted to electors; calling special election; submitting proposal at primary, regular, or special election called for other purposes; initiative proposal receiving majority of votes; proposal contemplating increased expenditure of funds; proposal increasing ad valorem property tax limitation; effective date; tax levy; action against city clerk.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE HOME RULE CITY ACT


Act 279 of 1909


117.25 Initiatory petition; filing with city clerk; contents; verification; signatures and inscriptions; perjury and other felonies; punishment; canvass; certifying sufficiency or insufficiency of petition; causing proposed amendment to be submitted to electors; calling special election; submitting proposal at primary, regular, or special election called for other purposes; initiative proposal receiving majority of votes; proposal contemplating increased expenditure of funds; proposal increasing ad valorem property tax limitation; effective date; tax levy; action against city clerk.

Sec. 25.

    (1) An initiatory petition authorized by this act shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk. The petition shall state what body, organization, or person is primarily interested in and responsible for the circulation of the petition and the securing of the amendment. Each sheet of the petition shall be verified by the affidavit of the person who obtained the signatures to the petition. The petition shall be signed by at least 5% of the qualified and registered electors of the municipality. Each signer of the petition shall also write, immediately after his or her signature, the date of signing and his or her street address. A signature obtained more than 1 year before the filing of the petition with the city clerk shall not be counted. The petition is subject to the requirements of section 25a.

    (2) A person who willfully affixes another's signature, or subscribes and swears to a verification that is false in any material particular, is guilty of perjury. A person who takes the oath of another to the petition not knowing him or her to be the same person he or she represents himself or herself to be or knowing that the petition or any part of it is false or fraudulent in any material particular, or who falsely represents that the proposed amendment is proposed by persons other than the true sponsors, is guilty of a felony and is liable for the same punishment as provided for perjury.

    (3) Upon receipt of the petition, the city clerk shall canvass it to ascertain if it is signed by the requisite number of registered electors. For the purpose of determining the validity of the petition, the city clerk may check any doubtful signatures against the registration records of the city. Within 45 days from the date of the filing of the petition, the city clerk shall certify the sufficiency or insufficiency of the petition. If the petition contains the requisite number of signatures of registered electors, the clerk shall submit the proposed amendment to the electors of the city at the next regular municipal or general state election held in the city which shall occur not less than 90 days following the filing of the petition.

    (4) If the petition contains the signatures of 20% or more of the persons residing in and registered to vote in the city as of the date when they signed it, and the petition requests submission of the proposal at a special election, the city clerk, within 90 days after the date of the filing of the petition, shall call a special election to be held on the next regular election date that is not less than 120 days after the petition was filed. Other proposals, whether initiated by a 5% petition or proposed by the legislative body within the times within this act provided, may be submitted at that election. A proposal submitted to the electors by the initiative and receiving an affirmative majority of the votes cast on the proposal shall not be held unconstitutional, invalid, or void on account of the insufficiency of the petition by which the proposal was submitted.

    (5) Except as provided by subsection (6), any proposal adopted by the electors that contemplates increased expenditure of funds by the municipality shall become effective only at the beginning of that fiscal year of the municipality commencing not earlier than 60 days following the election at which the proposal was approved by the electors.

    (6) If a proposal that increases the city's ad valorem property tax limitation applies, by its terms, for a specific year or period commencing before the date the proposal would otherwise take effect under subsection (5), the proposal shall be effective both from the date it is approved by the electors and retroactively for the year or period specified in the proposal. Notwithstanding a charter provision to the contrary, if a proposal is approved by the electors and given effect under this subsection after the city has levied its ad valorem property tax levy for the fiscal year and if the adopted proposal authorizes the levy of a millage rate for the fiscal year during which the proposal was approved in excess of the rate the city was authorized to levy before adoption of the proposal, the city may levy an additional tax. The additional tax shall be collected either by a supplementary billing by the city or at the same time and in the same manner the county's ad valorem property tax levy is collected.

    (7) A person aggrieved by an action, or failure of action, of the city clerk may bring an action against the clerk in the circuit court for writ of mandamus or for other appropriate relief.

History: 1909, Act 279, Eff. Sept. 1, 1909 ;-- Am. 1911, Act 203, Eff. Aug. 1, 1911 ;-- Am. 1913, Act 5, Imd. Eff. Mar. 11, 1913 ;-- CL 1915, 3328 ;-- Am. 1917, Act 6, Imd. Eff. Mar. 9, 1917 ;-- Am. 1919, Act 403, Eff. Aug. 14, 1919 ;-- Am. 1927, Act 187, Eff. Sept. 5, 1927 ;-- CL 1929, 2261 ;-- Am. 1939, Act 279, Eff. Sept. 29, 1939 ;-- Am. 1947, Act 87, Imd. Eff. May 12, 1947 ;-- CL 1948, 117.25 ;-- Am. 1969, Act 114, Imd. Eff. July 29, 1969 ;-- Am. 1982, Act 200, Imd. Eff. July 1, 1982 ;-- Am. 2003, Act 303, Eff. Jan. 1, 2005

Compiler's Notes:

    Act 203 of 1911, which amended this section, was held unconstitutional and void. See note to MCL 117.1.

    The 1911 amendment reads as follows: “Sec. 25. The initiatory petitions herein referred to shall be signed at the regular registration or election places at a regular registration or election under the supervision of the officials thereof, who shall verify the genuineness of the signatures and certify the fact that the signers are registered electors of the city and shall be filed with the city clerk. No person shall be deemed to be an elector under the provisions of this section except male electors whose names shall appear upon the registration books in such city. No such initiatory petition shall be effective unless signed by twenty-five per cent of the registered voters entitled to vote for municipal officers.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1968–2024 · leading case: Coalition for a Safer Detroit v. Detroit City Clerk, 820 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Coalition for a Safer Detroit v. Detroit City Clerk, 820 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “] The act also sets forth the following with regard to the handling of local elections in MCL 117.25: (1) An initiatory petition authorized by this act shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk.”
Herp v. Lansing City Clerk, 416 N.W.2d 367 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “] MCL 117.25; MSA 5.2104, referred to in § 8b, is part of the home rule cities act, MCL 117.”
Settles v. Detroit City Clerk, 427 N.W.2d 188 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 3× “First, MCL 117.25; MSA 5.2104 directs that the initiatory petitions for home rule city amendments shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk.”
Clarkston Cares 2022 v. Jennifer Speagle (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 13× “22, and MCL 117.25, and section 646a of the Michigan Election Law, MCL 168.”
Save the Vets. Mem'l v. City of Royal Oak (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 7× “The relevant part of HRCA §25, MCL 117.25, states: (1) An initiatory petition authorized by this act shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk.”
Grosse Pointe Farms Fire Fighters Ass'n v. Grosse Pointe Farms City Clerk, 157 N.W.2d 695 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968). · cites it 2× “CL 1948, § 117.25 (Stat Ann 1949 Rev § 5.2104). Petitions containing approximately 2,296 signatures were presented to defendant city clerk for certification to the Grosse Pointe Farms city council.”
Open Stores in Keego Harbor Comm. v. City of Keego Harbor (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “21 and MCL 117.25 of the HRCA, provides for the application process, regulation, and licensure of the two adult-use marijuana retail establishments at issue in the ordinance initiatory petition.”
Roseville Bd. of Election Commissioners v. Roseville City Clerk, 220 N.W.2d 181 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 2× “Defendant clerk, pursuant to the mandate of MCLA 117.25; MSA 5.2104, certified that there were sufficient valid signatures.”
Warren City Council v. Sonja Buffa (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “” Buffa claims that by requesting declaratory relief in the complaint, plaintiff defeated its request for mandamus, as it effectively admitted that another remedy is available.”
Horace Sheffield III v. Detroit City Clerk (Mich. 2021). “21; MCL 117.25; Kelly v Laing, 259 Mich 212, 217 (1932) (“Basically, revision suggests fundamental change, while amendment is a correction of detail.”
Oakland Cares Coalition v. Gwendolyn Turner (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “Given the similarity between the mandatory duty of a local clerk under the HRCA (the clerk “shall submit the proposed amendment to the electors” in MCL 117.25(3)) and the election law (the clerk “shall certify the ballot wording to the county clerk” in MCL 168.”
20221110_C361996_37_361996.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “Signatures on the petition shall be verified by a person under oath as the actual signatures of the persons whose names are signed to the petition, and the governing body of the county, city, village, or township shall have the same power to reject signatures and petitions as…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 117.25(1) — 4 cases
Coalition for a Safer Detroit v. Detroit City Clerk, 820 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). “] The act also sets forth the following with regard to the handling of local elections in MCL 117.25: (1) An initiatory petition authorized by this act shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk.”
Save the Vets. Mem'l v. City of Royal Oak (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “The relevant part of HRCA §25, MCL 117.25, states: (1) An initiatory petition authorized by this act shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk.”
Open Stores in Keego Harbor Comm. v. City of Keego Harbor (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “21 and MCL 117.25 of the HRCA, provides for the application process, regulation, and licensure of the two adult-use marijuana retail establishments at issue in the ordinance initiatory petition.”
Clio Yes 2024 v. Kelly Sproul (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 117.25(3) — 3 cases
Coalition for a Safer Detroit v. Detroit City Clerk, 820 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). “] The act also sets forth the following with regard to the handling of local elections in MCL 117.25: (1) An initiatory petition authorized by this act shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk.”
Clarkston Cares 2022 v. Jennifer Speagle (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “22, and MCL 117.25, and section 646a of the Michigan Election Law, MCL 168.”
Oakland Cares Coalition v. Gwendolyn Turner (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “Given the similarity between the mandatory duty of a local clerk under the HRCA (the clerk “shall submit the proposed amendment to the electors” in MCL 117.25(3)) and the election law (the clerk “shall certify the ballot wording to the county clerk” in MCL 168.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 117.25(7) — 4 cases
Warren City Council v. Sonja Buffa (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “” Buffa claims that by requesting declaratory relief in the complaint, plaintiff defeated its request for mandamus, as it effectively admitted that another remedy is available.”
Clarkston Cares 2022 v. Jennifer Speagle (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “22, and MCL 117.25, and section 646a of the Michigan Election Law, MCL 168.”
Warren City Council v. Sonja Buffa (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
City of Farmington v. Farmington Survey Comm. (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.