Gates’ Opponent Allowed to Keep Wording on Ballot

An appellate court ruled Tuesday that Linda Lea Calligan, a deputy running against Sheriff Brad Gates in the June election, may use statements in sample ballots that Gates has called false and misleading.

The order by the 4th District Court of Appeal in Santa Ana brought angry reaction from Gates’ supporters.

“This is absolutely insane,” said Gates’ campaign manager Eileen Padberg. “This is so typical of why voters are so frustrated with judges: because they just can’t make up their minds.”

None of the appellate justices could be reached for comment.

Gates said he plans to file an appeal today with the state Supreme Court.

“As far as I’m concerned I’m very disappointed that the (appellate) court has avoided the issue,” he said.

The order continues to block a lower court ruling, which Gates won, until the appellate court can hold a hearing on June 18, 15 days after the election.

Last Thursday, Superior Court Judge Judith M. Ryan ruled that the county registrar must delete “false and misleading” wording from Calligan’s statement of qualifications, which will be published in 1 million sample ballots.

The statement includes allegations that Gates has been convicted of a federal crime and has covered up the drunk-driving arrest of one of his deputies.

The appellate court gave Registrar Al Olson authority to print Calligan’s candidate statement “in its original, unexpurgated form.”

The registrar’s deadline to begin printing the ballots was originally April 7, just five days after Gates brought his lawsuit before Judge Ryan on April 2. Olson said printing has begun on election materials for other races and issues, but the final order to print the candidate statements for the sheriff’s race can wait until Thursday.

“I think I’ll just wait and see if the state Supreme Court decides to rule on this,” Olson said. “If it did go before the Supreme Court, I may be faced with the possible problem of scrapping the ballots and reprinting.”

Attorneys for both sides have said the sample ballots are very likely the only Calligan election material that will reach every voter.

Calligan had raised $7,800, a portion of which went to help pay for the 200-word statement of qualifications. Gates, meanwhile, has spent $55,000 on his reelection campaign since Jan. 1 and still has $114,000 in his campaign treasury.

Calligan’s attorney, William Yacobozzi Jr., said he and co-counsel Leland Sterling were pleased with the ruling.

“We read over everything last night and felt we were right legally. We’re very pleased,” Yacobozzi said.

Yacobozzi had argued that disallowing the sample ballot wording would infringe on free speech.

Gates’ attorney, John R. DiCaro, said he plans to ask the Supreme Court today for an immediate stay of Tuesday’s ruling.

“We’re sending it by express mail tonight and it should be filed at 10 a.m. tomorrow in San Francisco,” DiCaro said Tuesday.

The Superior Court ruling, he said, “takes away any remedy that the law provides and gives her (Calligan) a free taxpayer’s lunch.”

Calligan could not be reached for comment.