WILDOMAR: Judge rules against forcing November election
City's first election could be scheduled for June
By AARON CLAVERIE - Staff Writer | ∞
RIVERSIDE ---- A Riverside County Superior Court judge ruled Friday the Wildomar City Council is not required to schedule the fledgling city's first municipal election in November.
If the judge had ruled in favor of Wildomar resident Gerard Ste. Marie's lawsuit, the council would have been forced to divide the city into five voting districts and stage the city's inaugural election in November.
In that scenario, the seats on the council now occupied by Sheryl Ade and Scott Farnam, the two lowest votegetters in February's incorporation election, would have been up for grabs.
Judge Bernard Schwartz, discussing his ruling from the bench, said a council needs a reasonable amount of time to determine how a city will be divided up into districts.
He cited state law that says forming boundaries must take into account population, topography, geography, cohesiveness, abutting territories and demographics.
Also, Schwartz noted that Wildomar wouldn't have been able to meet the county's June 27 deadline for scheduling an election in November because the city wasn't incorporated until July 1.
In the February election, Wildomar voters approved incorporating the area as a city. The voters elected five residents to serve on the inaugural city council and approved dividing the city into districts for future elections.
According to state law, the council must establish those districts before the city's "next regular municipal election." State law doesn't detail when the council is required to schedule that election, however.
Schwartz said holding an election next year in June should give the council enough time to establish the district's boundaries.
"I don't think (the election) could happen before that," he said.
Ste. Marie's attorney, Carlsbad-based David Veljovich, asked the judge for permission to modify the suit, which was a petition for a judge's order, so the council would be required to schedule the election in June.
"If there's no election date specified by the court, we'll just be back here again," Veljovich said.
Schwartz called the June 2009 date an "arbitrary date" that shouldn't be construed as binding.
"The city could say, 'We need more time'," he said.
The attorney representing the city, Amy Hoyt of Riverside-based Burke, Williams and Sorensen, asked the judge to deny the request made by Ste. Marie's attorneys, saying they were angling to prolong the case so they could tack on new attorney's fees and "claim a victory."
Hoyt said state law allows the city council of a newly incorporated city to determine when to stage its first election.
"The city should be allowed to do its job here," she said.
Schwartz denied the request to amend the petition during Friday's hearing but said Ste. Marie can file a new petition. He said his ruling should give both sides an idea of when he thinks the election could be scheduled.
In the ruling, Schwartz wrote: "The court finds that the 'next regular municipal election' for City Council seats for the city of Wildomar should be the June 2009 election."
When the first Wildomar municipal election is held, the race will be for the seats representing the two even-numbered districts, Districts 2 and 4, and the terms of the two lowest votegetters 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.
Wildomar City Attorney Julie Hayward Biggs has said "it has been anticipated" that the city's first municipal election will be scheduled for November 2010.
She said that date would allow the city to consolidate the city election with the statewide general elections in even years to save the city the cost of funding its own election at one of the other dates when an election might be held.
In her response to Ste. Marie's lawsuit, Biggs said the city had to wait at least a year after the incorporation date before it could schedule an election.
Ste. Marie's attorneys disputed that claim, saying that requirement only applied to newly incorporated cities that elect their council at large rather than by district.
Ste. Marie and some of the other Wildomar residents who supported the election by district contend the council is trying to delay establishing the districts because all five members of the council supported at-large elections during the campaign.
Those residents say the city would be well-served by districts because Wildomar contains a mix of unique neighborhoods: new tract home developments; older, rural areas with ranches and manufactured homes; and the planned community of The Farm in the northeastern corner of the city.
Supporters of at-large elections have said nothing would prevent a resident from The Farm or any other section of the city from running for the council in an at-large election. They contend election by districts could divide the city into competing factions.
During a phone interview following the hearing, Veljovich said the court's ruling is very reasonable with respect to the June 2009 timing. And he said Ste. Marie was vindicated when the judge indicated that the one-year waiting period referenced by Biggs didn't apply in this case.
As for Hoyt's claim that he and Vista-based attorney, Dimetri Reyzin, were trying to string the case along because of fees, he said, "The claims are false and unfair."
Veljovich said the court does have the power to order the city to begin to create council districts immediately, as well as to do the other things necessary to hold the election in June.
"We are hopeful that the citizens of Wildomar, its city attorney and the interim Council will take all steps necessary to assure a prompt election under Section 34884 as the electorate demands," he said, referring to the state code that covers elections by district.
Contacted at her office, Hoyt said there is nothing in the judge's ruling that says the city has to schedule an election by June.
Mayor Bob Cashman said Friday afternoon that he believes June is "too soon."
"You have to do what makes common sense and that doesn't make common sense to me," he said. "But whatever the law is saying we'll be doing.
Contact staff writer Aaron Claverie at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2624, or aclaverie@californian.com.
Advertisement
WILDOMARTIAN wrote on Aug 2, 2008 4:46 AM:Well, now that Gerard Ste. Marie has had his little hissy-fit, the citizens and city council of Wildomar can finally turn to the business of running the city. Including setting up the districts! Unless, Gerard Ste. Marie is "cooking-up" another time consuming, money draining, spotlight grabbing scheme to "muck it up, again!" Stay tuned...
WildomarWatcher wrote on Aug 2, 2008 6:27 AM:No doubt that for Cashman and the council any date for an election that requires them to get started on drawing the districts would be "too soon". The council opposes the “by districts” decision of the voters and doesn’t want to create them.
The judge has outlined the criteria to be used in forming the districts, and a committee of competent Wildomar residents could assist in getting the job done promptly. There is no need for the council to hire another expensive, outside consultant. They are simply trying to make this task more complex and costly than necessary as a delaying tactic.
The council has a great opportunity with this issue to demonstrate their respect for the voters, and their willingness to comply with the law. Let’s see what they do.
To Wildomartian wrote on Aug 2, 2008 8:12 AM:Unfortunately you can be as rude and disparaging at you like in your comments.
However, that doesn’t alter the fact that the city council would have disregarded their obligation to form the voting districts and set a date for the next election without being pushed to do it by a lawsuit and the court.
Don’t condemn those concerned citizens who persevere in calling attention to the council’s failure to work within the law. Wildomar should be grateful it has a few people who are willing to expend their time, effort and money being community watchdogs. They are an essential component of the democratic process and part of the solution to Wildomar’s problems.
There are plenty of other legal issues with the way this council is conducting the city’s business. They should remind themselves they were elected to take care Wildomar, not just promote their vision of what the community should become...and their own political ambitions.
Stay tuned indeed!
They wont budge wrote on Aug 2, 2008 9:26 AM:Even after the Court ruled they were wrong, they won't budge. The lawyer for the City, Hoyt, said "there is nothing in the judge's ruling that says the city has to schedule an election by June." Mayor Bob Cashman said Friday afternoon that he believes June is "too soon." "You have to do what makes common sense and that doesn't make common sense to me," he said. This means THEY WILL DO NOTHING. They won't even TRY to make that deadline (ie. by starting the process.) They will act like little children stating "If I can't finish by then I won't even start."
If they don't start the process of setting up districts IMMEDIATELY, another lawsuit should be filed ASAP.
No Problem wrote on Aug 2, 2008 10:13 AM:No sweat, right? Just grab a map of Wildomar, draw five circles on it and call it good! People, it takes time to do these things. It takes time to do things right. Isn't that what we want? It's so easy, and instant, to sit and blog about how to get things done. The instant gratification, instant I want it now world we have allowed to be created. How's that mentality working out for those that used their homes as ATM machines, huh? Think about it. Try entering a real world, please. A world of prudence, common sense, caution, and care. Districting is a time-consuming process that requires them to take into account geography, demographics, and public input. That does not happen overnight. Everyone will agree on the districts drawn immediately, right? Nobody will file a lawsuit challenging how the districts were drawn or that they are in District 2 but feel they should be in District 3. Like that couldn't happen. Stay the course, City Council. Don't succumb to the noise makers that have lost touch with reality.
Be Reasonable wrote on Aug 2, 2008 11:09 AM:Why the rush to have another election? They aren't free. If the courts insisted on forcing one next June, it would cost a lot of money, because there are no regularly scheduled elections then. If they wait and piggyback onto either the statewide primary or general election in 2010, it's a lot cheaper.
The five people who were elected should be allowed a chance to serve. If the voters had said no to districts, Ade and Farnam would get to serve two years before having to stand for re-election. It's not unreasonable to give them that much time under the district system. The council should determine whether it wants June or November elections, then schedule the next one in 2010. By that time they will have needed to draw district boundaries and whatever districts are numbered 2 and 4 will be contested then.
WILDOMARTIAN wrote on Aug 2, 2008 1:35 PM:To: To Wildomartian [thanks to getting the spelling right :)]
The WCC has been given a mandate by the citizens of Wildomar. If the WCC avoids, pospones, ignore and/or delay that mandate, it will be their legacy AND thier LAST election!
Real "concerned citizens who persevere in calling attention to the council’s failure to work within the law" use the lawsuit as a last resort tool. What Gerard Ste. Marie should have done (like a real concerned citizen) is voiced his views through peaceful protest: demonstrating (picketing), letter writing, starting a recall campaign. But, no, Gerard Ste. Marie went straight to the time consuming & city fund wasting spotlight that makes everyone angry.
Keep tuning...
Same ol Song wrote on Aug 2, 2008 3:38 PM:Hey No problem - You sound like you are on the city council. The voters don't care what district they are in. What they do care about is that you draw the districts without a fight or a big production. It sounds like you are taking Mrs. Bigs advice and blow the Whole thing into a frizzy and send it to a vote again. That is what Mrs. Bigs did in Goleta to overturn the "by districts" to "at large". Isn't that the reason why you hired her in the first place?????
To Wildomartian wrote on Aug 2, 2008 3:51 PM:How presumptuous of you to assume that some of the alternate approaches you suggest were not tried before a lawsuit was filed! Perhaps you should confirm your facts with the city council or the city attorney before throwing your very own hissy-fit in print.
Who are you to dictate how concerned citizens go about expressing their dissatisfactions or what methods they select to correct wrongdoing? The courts are there for citizens to utilize at their discretion. They are a vital part of our democratic system.
Your suggestion that concerned voters wait four + years to see if these issues work themselves out is ludicrous. Too much potential harm can be done in that time. And as to all the wasted money, the council could prevent that by just doing what they’re supposed to do.
If the system isn't working, it needs to be fixed now, not years later.
To Same ol Song wrote on Aug 2, 2008 10:01 PM:No, I'm not a city council member. Just a resident that tires of noise making, complaining, grandstanding, sticks in the mud. Ste. Marie might well be the President-emeritus of that group. Ever since I started watching what's happening here I've discovered there to be 3 groups of folks: 1) Active, involved, reasonable, and caring folks trying to do the right thing. 2) The ones that complain that the sky is blue and that water is wet. 3) The biggest bunch that just doesn't seem to care much. I like the Group 1 folks. They are trying to make a positive difference. I can empathize to a certain extent with the Group 3 folks. They are busy, haggard, have other priorities than civic-mindedness. That's OK. It's the Group 2's that are a waste of good oxygen. Which group would you like to belong to?
WILDOMARTIAN wrote on Aug 3, 2008 12:56 PM:To: To Wildomartian (8-02-08 @3:51 PM)
No, the courts are there to inturpet law not "...for citizens to utilize at their discretion." (What those that mean anyway???) If the those responsible methods were tried, they were not tried hard enough (going through the motions is not enough!) By the way, you need to learn how to count better, April 2010 is only 17 months away not 4+ years. "...And as to all the wasted money, the council could prevent that by just doing what they’re supposed to do." Like fixing the roads, increasing fire and police protection, etc.? As far as the districts lines being drawn, that should be done by a commission headed by a single councilmember. Then the final district map proposal needs to be presnted to the whole council for approval. Maybe you (concern citizen) should get on that commission?
Note to all my fellow bloggers: I VOTED FOR DISTRICTS! And only one of the present coucil members (HINT: Not Cashman or Moore)
To Wildomartian wrote on Aug 3, 2008 6:49 PM:I believe the "norming" conventions, which the present interim council hastily approved, call for starting city council terms in January following the election in the previous year. Let's count together before you send me back to school for a refresher course in basic arithmetic.
It's now August 2008, if we elect some council members anytime in 2010 their terms will start January 2011. Then in 2012, if we elect candidates for the remaining seats, their terms start in January 2013. It will take 4 years and 4 months to potentially replace or re-elect the entire current city council members.
Whether it’s three, four or five years, from my point of view it is too long to make needed corrections.
As I’ve sifted through all your very angry comments, I have actually found something we appear to agree on. Your suggestion regarding the drawing up of the districts closely matches mine. Let’s get one council member to lead a commission or committee and get the job done without an outside consultant. Keep the group local, lean, focused; give them concise instructions and a firm deadline.
Wildomar has plenty of intelligent, concerned and people who could assist with this task. Local people who would gladly step up and serve the community. Data needed to do the job is readily available from local, county, state and federal resources.
I’m ready to serve and without any compensation, are you?
WILDOMARTIAN wrote on Aug 3, 2008 11:57 PM:To: To Wildomartian (8-03-08 @ 6:49)
The point is that the districts need to be drawn BY 2010 (We're still at 17 months). So the conversion process to districts can start (two down three to go). And whats to say that the current council won't wake up and see the errors of their ways & start honoring the citizens mandates? (WOW, doubtful but possible). The WCC's authority started on July 1, 2008 (one month ago), even if the WCC had been working on the districts from day one, someone would be having their hissy (Gerard Ste. Marie) because it's not done yet. Hmmm, now that I think of it could this be a ploy for Gerard Ste. Marie to run again for council?
Why yes, I am ready and have been for about two months. When I spoke to one of the coucilmembers (on this subject), in person, that I met at a city council meeting prior to July 1st, 2008.
I think we're looking at the same coin from two different sides,
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement