Pontiac mayoral candidate convicted in election-fraud scheme faces challenge under Kwame-inspired ban - Detroit Metro Times

Pontiac Mayoral Candidate's Conviction Raises Questions About Eligibility to Run for Office Under Kwame-Inspired Ban.

A Michigan activist has filed an emergency court motion questioning whether Pontiac mayoral candidate Michael McGuinness is eligible to run for office under a state constitutional amendment inspired by former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick’s corruption scandal. The amendment prohibits former public officials convicted of a felony involving dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or breach of the public trust from holding elected office or a high-level public job for 20 years.

McGuinness, now president of the Pontiac City Council, served as chairman of the Oakland County Democratic Party when he became involved in an election-fraud scheme during the 2010 campaign cycle. He was accused of forging documents and placing three Tea Party candidates on the ballot under a third party to mislead voters and draw votes away from Republicans in several 2010 local races.

In 2011, McGuinness was convicted of uttering and publishing and perjury in connection with the case and sentenced to probation, community service, and a $1,000 fine. His court records have since been sealed, but Kelley's motion argues that the unsealing of the court file is necessary to discover and learn the employment and specific circumstances of McGuinness’s conviction.

Kelley, represented by Detroit attorney Todd Russell Perkins, says the case raises important questions about public integrity and transparency. Perkins notes that McGuinness's conviction was not just a felony offense but also one in which he tried to affect the outcome of an election.

The motion states that Kelley is committed to ensuring that the vote in his community is free from improprieties and intends to seek further legal action depending on what the unsealed records reveal. McGuinness has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

The Kwame-inspired ban, passed in 2010, was enacted following public outrage over political corruption and aimed to restore confidence in government and prevent disgraced officials from returning to power. The question of whether serving as a political party chair qualifies as holding a position in local, state, or federal government under the amendment remains unclear.

As McGuinness seeks to run for mayor, his eligibility to do so hangs in the balance. If convicted of violating the ban, it could have significant implications for his campaign and the future of Pontiac politics.

I'm all about this guy Michael McGuinness running for mayoral candidate, like totally deserves a shot . I mean, what's the harm in having someone with a past conviction? It's not like he committed some super serious crime or anything. He was just a little shady with some election docs and got caught. Probation, community service, and a $1k fine? Not exactly the end of the world .

And let's be real, Kwame Kilpatrick's corruption scandal wasn't even that relevant to this situation anyway. It's just a bunch of politicians trying to restrict each other's options. I say let McGuinness run and if he does bad stuff, well, then so be it . He can always clean up his act... or not .

I'm not surprised that this is coming up, but I do think McGuinness's conviction should be looked into more closely. I mean, we can't just let people with a history of shady behavior run for office without checking their past first . The Kwame-inspired ban was put in place to prevent exactly this kind of thing from happening again.

But at the same time, 20 years is a pretty long time to be barred from public service. I'm not saying McGuinness should automatically be disqualified, but maybe there's some nuance here that we're missing. What does it even mean for someone to "affect the outcome" of an election? Is that really grounds for disqualification?

I think what Kelley is trying to say is that we need more transparency and accountability in our government, and if McGuinness's conviction shows him to be unfit for office, then maybe he shouldn't run. But I'm not sure it's that clear-cut. We should be having this conversation, though - it's exactly the kind of thing that needs to happen if we want to restore confidence in our democracy

This whole thing is super weird. So, a guy who's running for mayor got caught up in some sketchy election drama back in 2010 and was convicted of forgery... but he only did community service instead of jail time? And now someone's trying to get his old court records unsealed so they can figure out if he's eligible to run. Like, isn't the whole point of a ban on former officials that they wouldn't be able to take advantage of their power like this again?

I don't know what's more concerning - the fact that McGuinness got off with such light punishment or the fact that his opponent is trying to use the unsealed records to potentially take him down. This whole thing just feels super politicized, and I'm not sure what's more important: public integrity or the fact that one guy's running for mayor?

this whole thing is just a mess i mean michael mcguinness gets off scot free with a slap on the wrist and now he's trying to run for mayor again? that doesn't sit right with me. what if someone else tried to pull something like this? would we want them in office too? the whole thing just feels like a huge grey area and i'm not sure why they're making it so hard for people to get on with their lives after they've served time

This whole thing is super concerning . I mean, I get that we all make mistakes, but this level of dishonesty and corruption is just not okay. The fact that McGuinness was involved in an election-fraud scheme and then got off with a slap on the wrist (literally, he only got probation) is just mind-boggling . And now he's trying to run for mayor under the Kwame-inspired ban? It's like, how can we trust him to lead our city when he's already shown himself to be so willing to bend the rules and game the system? The fact that Kelley is fighting this in court makes total sense – we need to make sure that public officials are held accountable for their actions. This whole thing needs to get to the bottom, ASAP

omg u guyz this is wild pontiac mayoral canditate michael mcguiness is like facing a huge problum cuz he got convikted of election fraude in 2011 now hes tryin to run 4 mayor nd ppl r askin if hes eligible lol i mean whats up wit dat? if he got sealed court records thats even more sus he cant just not answer questions bout it

Wow Interesting that someone is questioning whether this guy is eligible to run for office after serving some time for election-fraud and stuff... seems kinda harsh but I guess if you've been caught cheating in an election, it's only fair to have a little more scrutiny.

OMG u guys, this is getting real ! I just can't believe Michael McGuinness is even trying to run for mayor with a felony conviction under his belt! Like what's next? Is he going to try to hide it or something? The Kwame-inspired ban was put in place to prevent people like him from getting back into power and influencing elections, but here he is, trying to do the exact same thing. It's just not right. I'm all for second chances and rehabilitation, but this guy needs to prove himself first.

And can we talk about how shady it is that his court records are sealed? What are they hiding? The activist who filed the emergency motion is onto something here, and I hope she gets some answers soon. This whole situation just smells like a power play to me. Pontiac politics just got a lot more interesting, and I'm not sure if anyone's coming out on top in this mess

I don't know about this Kwame-inspired ban thingy... seems like it's from a whole different era, you know? Like, remember when politicians actually got in trouble for their actions back in the day? Nowadays, it feels like they just sweep everything under the rug and move on. I mean, Michael McGuinness gets a slap on the wrist with probation and community service, and suddenly he's good to go again?

And what's up with this whole "eligibility" thing? It's not like he was caught red-handed or anything... more like, he got caught trying to pull some fast ones. I'm just waiting for someone to tell me where the rulebook is so we can figure out if he's allowed to run for mayor or not.

This guy's past is super sketchy , like what was he thinking trying to rig an election? And now he wants to be mayor of Pontiac? That's a huge conflict of interest. I mean, if he gets convicted again it'll ruin his reputation and probably end his campaign. It's just not right that some politicians think they can just sweep their past mistakes under the rug and still hold power. The Kwame-inspired ban was meant to prevent people like him from getting elected in the first place . I'm keeping a close eye on this story, it's definitely got my attention

I think this is a total overreaction. A 20-year ban from holding public office? That's crazy talk! I mean, what's next? Banning people who've been late to work or something? It's just an amendment meant to prevent politicians from getting away with stuff like Kwame Kilpatrick's corruption scandal.

I don't see the point of keeping this guy from running for mayor just because he had a tiny little mistake in his past. It's not like it's a felony-level offense... although, I do think forging documents and trying to affect an election outcome is pretty serious . But come on, 20 years? That's just excessive.

And what's with the court records being sealed? Can't we just let this guy move on from his past mistakes already? It's not like he's a repeat offender... or is it? Maybe Kelley's motion is onto something, but I think there needs to be more context before we start jumping to conclusions about McGuinness's eligibility.

I'm not surprised at all that someone's trying to challenge McGuinness' eligibility . I mean, who wouldn't want to take a closer look at their past? It's like they say, "the truth will set you free"... or in this case, it'll probably just lead to more trouble . And let's be real, this whole thing is just a publicity stunt to get attention and votes. I'm not buying it .

I mean come on, dude. Can't even trust a guy who's been to prison for voter suppression with our city's future? 20 years is a decent amount of time to rebuild trust after being convicted of electoral shenanigans. If anyone's eligibility should be questioned, it's McGuinness' ability to lead with integrity...

This whole situation is giving me major déjà vu ... I mean, we've been here before with Kwame Kilpatrick's scandal, and now this is happening all over again in Pontiac . Michael McGuinness's conviction is definitely a red flag, especially considering his role in the 2010 election-fraud scheme .

I'm not sure what's more concerning - the fact that he was convicted of uttering and publishing and perjury or the fact that he's trying to run for mayor without fully disclosing his past . The Kwame-inspired ban is definitely meant to prevent people like McGuinness from getting back into power, but I guess we're about to find out if it's really effective .

The question of whether serving as a political party chair qualifies as holding a position in local government under the amendment is a good one . It's not entirely clear-cut, and that's what's making Kelley's motion so important - he wants to get to the bottom of this and make sure the vote in Pontiac is fair and transparent .

I just hope that whoever ends up running for mayor has a clean record and can actually deliver on their promises . This whole situation is giving me serious concerns about the integrity of the election process

This is a tough spot for Michael McGuinness. On one hand, 15 years on probation isn't much time to make up for his past mistakes . On the other hand, being chair of the Oakland County Democratic Party was a pretty high-profile job that could be seen as similar to holding public office . I think it's reasonable for Kelley to want to review McGuinness's court records and make sure he's not trying to sneak in under the radar . The Kwame-inspired ban is meant to restore confidence in government, so it's gotta be enforced fairly . If McGuinness can demonstrate that he's learned from his mistakes and has no plans to engage in similar shenanigans, then maybe he should be given a second chance . But if the records show otherwise, it might be best for him to wait out his probation period before running for mayor again .

I'm getting a bad vibe from this whole situation... like, what's going on with our politicians, right? So Michael McGuinness was involved in some shady stuff back in 2010 - forgery, perjury, you name it! And now he's running for mayoral office in Pontiac? That's just not cool. And to make matters worse, there's this Kwame-inspired ban that prohibits former public officials with felony convictions from holding office for 20 years... but is that still a thing? It seems like we're stuck in some bureaucratic limbo.

And what's up with the fact that McGuinness's court records have been sealed, but now they've been unsealed? That just raises more questions about transparency and accountability. I mean, can't we trust our politicians to do the right thing? It's not like this is a new issue - we've seen similar scandals in the past, and it's always the same story: corruption, deceit, and a lack of integrity.

I'm not saying McGuinness is automatically disqualified from running for office... but something just doesn't feel right here. Can't we have some clear guidelines and accountability measures to ensure our politicians are doing what's best for us? It's time for some real change in Pontiac politics, if you ask me!

idk about this guy mcguinnns... sounds like he had some serious issues with the law back in 2010 . now he's trying to be mayor? that's a bit sketchy if you ask me. how did his conviction get sealed after just a year? and what exactly did he do to affect the outcome of an election? these are the questions we need answers on . can't just assume someone is eligible for office without doing the research, right?

this whole thing is like a big ol' mirror held up to our society - we're all worried about one guy getting away with something, but what about all the people who've been serving in public office without so much as a blip on their radar? it's easy to forget that corruption exists everywhere, and sometimes it's not even intentional...

This is getting crazy . So now our mayoral candidate Michael McGuinness might not be eligible to run for office because of a 20-year ban from holding public office due to a felony conviction involving election fraud? That's like saying you can't have a second chance just because it's been a decade since the mistake happened.

I mean, what's next? Are we gonna start looking at people's past social media posts and determining their character? It's all about personal responsibility, not punishment for life. And let's be real, this whole thing is just another example of politicians playing politics with the rules . I'm not saying McGuinness didn't make a mistake, but 20 years might be a bit excessive.

This whole Kwame-inspired ban thing needs to be taken a closer look at. Was it really necessary? Did it serve any purpose other than to create more red tape and potentially disenfranchise voters? The real question is what's the real intention here – to keep someone from running because of a past mistake or to actually uphold some kind of accountability?