Directories
Quick Searches
Find a Job
Quick Search
For Employers
Yahoo! HotJobs Local Search
WILDOMAR: Registrar arguing against November election
Resident has filed a lawsuit to force citywide election this fall
By AARON CLAVERIE - Staff Writer | ∞
WILDOMAR ---- If the Riverside County Registrar of Voters has anything to say about it, seats on the Wildomar City Council will not be up for grabs in November.
The registrar, Barbara Dunmore, filed a declaration late last week with Riverside County Superior Court to object to a Wildomar resident's lawsuit that attempts to force the council to divide the city into five voting districts and put two seats into play this year.
A hearing on the merits of the lawsuit, filed against the council on July 9 by Gerard Ste. Marie, is scheduled Friday morning at the courthouse in Riverside. Ste. Marie, at the request of the presiding judge, added the county of Riverside and the registrar's office to his suit after a hearing in mid-July.
In his suit, Ste. Marie argues that state law requires a newly incorporated city that decided to elect future council members by district to divide the city into those five districts before the "next regular municipal election" after the city's incorporation.
But Ste. Marie's interpretation of the phrase "next regular municipal election" differs from the interpretation offered by Wildomar and county officials.
Ste. Marie contends the upcoming November election should be considered the next election because Wildomar voters will be heading to the polls.
City officials argue that the November election can't be the "next" municipal election because the city has not scheduled its first municipal election yet and can't do so until after July 1, 2009, a date one year removed from the city's incorporation.
According to state law: whenever the first Wildomar municipal election is held, the seats representing the two even-numbered districts, Districts 2 and 4, will be open and the terms of the two lowest votegetters ---- council members Scott Farnam and Sheryl Ade ---- will expire.
In the following election, the seats representing the three odd-numbered districts will be open and the terms of the three highest votegetters ---- council members Marsha Swanson, Bridgette Moore and Mayor Bob Cashman ---- will expire.
State law requires a city's legislative body to establish the council's district boundaries ---- and number the districts ---- before voters can nominate candidates for the district races in the "next regular municipal election."
In her declaration, Dunmore says cities in Riverside County needed to schedule an election this year by June 27, a deadline that passed before the city of Wildomar was incorporated on July 1.
If the registrar's office is required to readjust the Wildomar area ballot for the November election at this late stage, Dunmore said it will interfere with the election process and hamper the ability of the office to meet "critical deadlines."
Wildomar's interim city attorney, Julie Hayward Biggs, said it will ultimately be up to Wildomar's City Council to decide when to slot its first municipal election.
"First, the council will have to decide when it is going to hold elections, then they schedule the first one. Then, all the provisions of (state code referenced by Ste. Marie in his lawsuit) apply," she said.
During a recent public meeting, Biggs said the city's first election cannot take place for at least one year after the effective date of incorporation and it is anticipated that the first municipal election will not be held until November of 2010.
In an e-mail she sent to The Californian this week, she clarified the comment, noting that the council could schedule an election as early as November of 2009 but that the first date that a general municipal election could be consolidated with a statewide election would be November 2010.
"It has been anticipated that the choice will be to consolidate the city election with the statewide general elections in even years to save the cost to the city of funding its own election at one of the other dates when an election might be held," she wrote.
Those dates, as detailed by Biggs:
-- Second Tuesday of April 2010
-- First Tuesday in June of 2010
-- First Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2009 or 2010 (this would require consolidation with either the school district or state general election).
Ste. Marie's Vista-based attorney, Dimetri Reyzin, contends there is no requirement for new cities to wait for at least a year before scheduling an election.
The section of state code cited by Biggs in her response to Ste. Marie's lawsuit doesn't apply when a city votes to elect future council members by district, he said.
"And she hasn't brought up any support for her position," he said Tuesday.
If the judge decides not to force the city to schedule an election for November, the next available election date is March of 2009, Reyzin said.
There are only a handful of general law cities in the state that elect council members by district. Most of the cities that use districts are large cities governed by voter-approved charters.
Reyzin said he hasn't found any record of a lawsuit similar to the suit filed by Ste. Marie.
That rarity means the judge, Bernard Schwartz, could establish a precedent with his ruling on Friday, Reyzin said.
Contact staff writer Aaron Claverie at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2624, or aclaverie@californian.com.
Advertisement
Gomez wrote on Jul 30, 2008 10:16 PM:The city council members hired Mrs. Bigs to fend off any attempt to form districts. They will fight and waste Wildomars money until the city council gets their way.
Observer wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:10 PM:The Californian's articles on this subject echo the statements of the Wildomar city council members. They both want to support second-guessing the voters who clearly decided on elections "by district".
Maybe it's time for all of them to accept the decision of the voters and quit making these outdated statements about only large cities having elections by districts. That may have been true in the distant past, but the old “rules of thumb” don’t apply today. Wildomar may be small in size geographically, but it has very distinct, diverse areas.
Our neighboring cities of Moreno Valley and Menifee both decided on elections by district for good reasons. Wildomar needs the protections “by district” elections will afford voters. It will help ensure all our areas are properly represented on the city council.
Bingo wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:36 PM:...the City Council will just wait as long as they want because they know they will be voted out. They claim they don't have to set elections until they want to... that is like the condemned setting his own execution date.
To Bingo wrote on Jul 31, 2008 7:26 AM:Wow! You hit the nail on the head. This city council is banking on having 4 years of free rein to do exactly what they want, when they want. they're busy with their grand development schemes while neglecting the city's essential business and legal obligations.
Concerned One wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:19 AM:From an organizational point of view, representation by districts in a small city is a bad idea. It severely limits the talent pool for one. And, it pits council members against each other in mini turf wars as opposed to acting on what's best for the city at large. Sorry Wildomarians, I won't comment any more as I'm not a resident. But consider my points. Regards C-1.
Say no more wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:08 AM:The election is over. Wildomar voted to elect council members by district. Why then are you still bringing up election viewpoints? We need to get to the business of the city and draw districts, not debate over the issue again and again. C-1 you lost the at large issue, get over it.
To Concerned One wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:10 AM:Your assumptions are negative and way off base. We need to deal with reality here.
First, the voters have already decided on elections "by districts". It doesn't matter whether you or anyone else, including the city council, thinks it was or is a bad organizational idea. The voters have already made their choice. If anyone wants to invalidate that vote, then the decision to incorporate should be called into question on the same grounds.
The real problem is that the present elected city council doesn’t recognize or acknowledge the legal limitations of their powers. They are doing everything possibly to delay the drawing of the districts and setting a date for the next election.
The real danger to Wildomar is that we get stuck with what we have now. A council dominated by commercial development advocates who represent only a small portion of the city and the special interest groups who elected them. Any danger of a future mini turf war is offset by the large, out-of-control one we already have.
WILDOMARTIAN wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:05 PM:First of all I am NOT a fan of any of the Wildomar City Council members (except 1), but to have another election four months after incorporation is absurd! Gerard Ste. Marie needs to get a life and stop wasting the limited amount of city funds, he claims the WCC is squandering! Wildomar can survive until second Tuesday of April 2010. Give the first WCC a chance to sink or swim. Hell Murrieta did with theirs and they managed to survive!
To Wildomarian wrote on Jul 31, 2008 4:30 PM:Why in the name of heaven would we give this city council several more years to muck up Wildomar’s finances and our environment? I say nip their bad behavior in the bud, and take action NOW.
If they were following the law, suing them wouldn’t be necessary. Put the blame for wasting time, effort and money squarely where it belongs. It’s the council and their staff that are wasting the taxpayers’ dollars.
WILDOMARTIAN wrote on Aug 1, 2008 3:42 AM:To: To Wildomarian (mispelled), who said "serveral years?" It's only 17 months till April 2010. As far as mucking up the city's finances, (like increasing polce protection) the WCC has only this term to get the city's future moving in the right direction or they will be voted out! Districts or not! The environment??? You mean like keeping everything the status quo, stagnant. That's right! No more of those pesky parks!
As for following the law, that's what the courts are going interpret and make the a ruling. Which ever way the courts decide, the smart thing for the WCC is to abide by it. The only remaining question is, will Gerard Ste. Marie do the same or will he "muck it up" again and waste more of the city's finances???
WildomarWatcher wrote on Aug 2, 2008 7:46 AM:The Wildomar interim city council has now been presented with a golden opportunity to demonstrate their respect for the voters' decisions, and their willingness to comply with the law rather than continuing to try to circumvent or thwart it.
Let’s see if they're smart enough to take hold of that opportunity or if they will continue to play games with forming the voting districts. What they do will go a long way towards revealing their true characters.
It should be very interesting.
- ESCONDIDO: Man shot dead at Fourth of July party (10858)
- TEMECULA: Protesters line intersection (6838)
- ESCONDIDO: Border Patrol employee in custody after hatchet attack (5711)
- ESCONDIDO: 3 DUI arrests, 46 impounds at checkpoint (5613)
- ESCONDIDO: City's dreams of an 'upscale' downtown may be dying (5140)
- HOUSING: Local median price up for third straight month (45)
- ESCONDIDO: Man shot dead at Fourth of July party (44)
- ESCONDIDO: Border Patrol employee in custody after hatchet attack (34)
- FALLBROOK: Peruvian chocolatier living sweet American dream (29)
- ESCONDIDO: Victim's roommate recalls July 4 shooting, friends gather for vigil (27)
Advertisement