City Correct in Rejecting Documents : Santa Ana’s Action Affecting Election Bid Upheld by Judge

A Superior Court judge ruled Thursday that the Santa Ana city clerk was correct in rejecting documents submitted after a deadline by a Santa Ana citizens’ group seeking to change local election laws.

Jim Lowman, spokesman for the Santa Ana Merged Society of Neighbors (SAMSON), said the group is now considering a new tactic--pulling a council member’s name “out of a hat” and collecting signatures for a recall because that would force a special election, which could include the proposed election changes.

By law, a recall must be held within 125 days after signatures are submitted.

SAMSON members hope to gather enough signatures for a ballot proposition that would require the mayor to be directly elected (the office is currently filled by City Council appointment) and council members to be elected by wards.

Lowman filed a notice of intent to circulate petitions with City Clerk Janice Guy Jan. 10 and published the notice in the Orange County Register the next day.

But election laws require that an affidavit in proof of publication be submitted within 10 days, according to Guy. When Lowman tried to submit the affidavit on Jan. 23, Guy told him he had missed the deadline by two days.

Judge Harmon Scoville ruled that Guy acted correctly. The ruling means SAMSON members must publish a notice and file documents with the city again before they can begin gathering signatures--a process that takes about two weeks.

If the ruling had favored SAMSON, the petitions could have been circulated Saturday, but the group now must wait until Feb. 17. The delay is considered crucial because SAMSON is on a tight timetable for a June ballot.

To put an issue before the voters, a minimum of 6,288 valid signatures of registered Santa Ana voters must be gathered. The signatures must then be counted, a process that Guy said would take a minimum of two weeks, and the city must notify the county registrar of voters of a June election by March 7.

Lowman said the group wanted to put the issue to voters in June so that it could take effect by November, when three councilmen are up for reelection. However, SAMSON attorney Milo DeArmey noted that the council is only required to put the proposition on the next regularly scheduled ballot, which would be in November.

Cost Put at $75,000

Several council members already have said they would not approve a June election, and they formed a committee last Monday to study the election proposals for inclusion on the November ballot. Guy estimated the cost of a special election at about $75,000, compared to about $15,000 for a consolidated ballot in November.

Since recall elections must be held within 125 days after signatures are submitted, SAMSON probably will opt for a recall to force a ballot in July, which would include the election changes, Lowman said. “To be fair about it, we’d put all seven names in a hat and pick one,” he said.

SAMSON member George Hanna said he believes the refusal to accept the affidavit reflects one of the group’s basic premises: that city officials aren’t responsive to the citizenry. The organization is a coalition of groups embroiled in various disputes with the city.

However, Deputy City Atty. Tom Ong said city officials had done as much as possible to assist SAMSON members, including giving them a memo detailing the deadlines and requirements.