Signature haggling continues in Houston anti-bias ordinance case

HOUSTON—In what many expected to be the final hearing in the lawsuit against the City of Houston and Mayor Annise Parker, attorneys continued Monday to haggle over the signature count on a petition drive to recall a controversial non-discrimination ordinance. Only a few hundred signatures separate Houston residents from getting to vote on the ordinance, which makes sexual orientation a protected class. But with a ballot deadline looming, plaintiffs are losing patience.

Frustrated by yet another delay in the conclusion of the case that began in late January, plaintiffs’ attorney Andy Taylor said he was hopeful for a win but delivered his sharpest criticism yet of the city’s defense.

“The law does not require good handwriting,” Taylor said after the hearing, condemning the defense’s legibility argument that discounted thousands of signatures on the petition. In a post-trial ruling, Judge Robert Schaeffer said in order for voter signatures to count, the signature of the circulator must be legible.

Surrounded by about 60 supporters representing the city’s racial and ethnic diversity, Taylor called the legibility requirement a “modern day poll tax.”

African-American supporters agreed, including mayoral candidate Ben Hall who attended the hearing at the plaintiff’s invitation.

“It’s embarrassing to me that here we are in 2015 and having a sophisticated poll tax under the guise of litigation,” Hall told me. “To burden the right to vote, that’s an embarrassing predicament for this city.”

The small gallery in the 152nd District Court could not hold all the plaintiffs’ supporters, who filled two ante rooms and the hallway in hopes of hearing a decision in their favor. Back-and-forth court filings as late as Sunday evening left the judge with more questions than answers Monday morning, but he ordered final judgments by Friday.

Plaintiffs needed 17,269 registered voter signatures in order to put the ordinance to a vote. Taylor said his count, as of Monday, was 17,510. Defense claims the plaintiffs fall short with only 16,619.

“This case should not turn on their tally. … This tally is done by advocates for the other side,” Taylor told the judge, stopping short of accusing the defense of wrongdoing.

Lead defense attorney Geoffrey Harrison shot back, arguing Taylor was challenging the court’s ruling with “suggestion bias and other lies” in order to inflate the count in the plaintiffs’ favor.

But in an ironic twist of evidence, Harrison criticized one circulator’s signature as “clearly illegible” and then cited that circulator by name.

“Why is it every time we have a hearing, the city’s signature count changes?” Taylor asked.

At the close of the trial in February, the defense team claimed plaintiffs had collected fewer than 4,000 valid signatures. But new post-trial criteria established by Schaeffer required a recount, breathing new life into the plaintiff’s case.

Both sides are expected to appeal an unfavorable ruling. Taylor anticipates the appellate court will recognize as many as 35,000 signatures.

Confident not only in the law of man but in the faithfulness of God, F.M. Williams, a plaintiff and one of several pastors involved in the case against the city told reporters, “I believe truth will win. We believe our God will prevail.”