Posted on 06/26/2006 7:34:30 PM PDT by 11th_VA
SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. -- A judge ruled Monday that an activist had not collected enough signatures to prompt a city vote on a measure that would severely curtail the rights of undocumented immigrants.
San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge A. Rex Victor granted activist Joseph Turner 10 days to collect the signatures needed to qualify his measure for a September special election in the city 70 miles east of Los Angeles.
The initiative, which the City Council referred to voters last month, would be one of the most far-reaching in the nation in its effort to limit the rights of undocumented immigrants.
As written, it would bar undocumented residents from renting in the city and force day laborers to prove they are legal residents. The initiative would also ban day labor centers, deny permits, contracts and grants to employers who hire illegal immigrants and require that city business be conducted in English.
Turner said after the judge's ruling that he doubted that he would try to collect the needed signatures in the 10-day window, but would instead return to voters with an even "more draconian" initiative.
"I was told I needed to gather a certain number of signatures and I gathered those signatures. I followed the process to the T, to the letter. And now they tell me, 'You're wrong,'" Turner said. "This is not going to deter me or make me go away. I'm going to come back harder and stronger."
The initiative has attracted national attention and prompted copycat measures elsewhere, including in Hazleton, Pa. That city recently gave tentative approval to a measure that would revoke the business licenses of companies that employ illegal immigrants, impose $1,000 fines on landlords who rent to undocumented immigrants and make English the city's official language.
In San Bernardino, the debate over the initiative has created tension among the city's population of 200,000. Just under 50 percent are Hispanic, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. Its previous mayor was a Hispanic woman elected to two terms.
On Friday, an immigration rights activist was cited for battery after allegedly slapping Turner following a court hearing.
The council was set to schedule an election date earlier this month, but instead voted to ask a judge to determine whether they could legally do that after receiving a letter from an attorney challenging the process.
Attorney Dana W. Reed, who represents resident Florentino Garza, questioned the formula city officials used to determine how many signatures were needed to put the measure on the ballot.
The city charter states an ordinance's author must gather enough signatures to equal 30 percent of voters "at the last preceding city election at which a mayor was elected."
The initiative petition qualified last month with 2,216 signatures, which was at least 30 percent of the number of voters who cast ballots in the 2001 mayoral race.
But Reed contended the city should have used February's mayoral runoff as its base for determining how many signatures were needed. Doing so would have required Turner to gather 4,771 signatures, according to Reed.
It's Bush vs. Gore all over again....
Being that this is San Berdoo, they would probably have more luck if they pushed for clemency for Methamphetamine users.
"Turner said: This is not going to deter me or make me go away. I'm going to come back harder and stronger."
Good!
R O T F L M A O !
In NJ the Dems were losing in the public opinion polls when the scandal ridden Sen Torricelli ran against the GOP challenger Forrester. When the Senator decided to drop out of the race, the Dems had one problem, the name on the ballot cannot be changed within 45 days of election day per NJ election rules (new Dem candidate had to be entered on the ballot as a write in). The Dems needed to win every election possible to retain control in the US Senate, so they got the NJ Supreme Court to waive the rule under the argument that without a new name on the ballot there will be no competitive election, so the court ruled "that there was a compelling need to maintain democracy a second choice had to be available to the voters". Funny there were Third Party candidates listed on the ballot. Furthermore, other Third Partys had to adhere to the election rules and deadlines to get their candiates printed on the ballot, otherwise they would be disqualified. They never got the breaks like the two big parties.
Am I understanding the math properly. A town with about 200,000 residents. The number of signatures needed was 30% of the number of votes cast in mayoral race. 2,216 signatures qualified meaning that only ~ 7,500 people voted in the mayoral race? Can that be right? Even using the new number of 4,771 only equals ~15,900 votes cast.
...yet this issue can't even get 1/3 of the people who voted for mayor to sign on to fixing it.
Just wanted to clarify what exactly happenened here.
The City Clerk's office, gave us the rules and procedures with respect to the creation, circulation and qualification of this ballot initiative.
We were instructed, as it reads in the City Charter, to gather signatures totaling 30% of the total votes cast for mayor in the last preceding election in which a mayor was elected. We submitted our notice of intent to circulate in October of 2005 and placed our public notice on Nov. 3, 2005.
At that time, the last preceding election was in November 2001 when the Mayor ran unopposed. As a result of that turnout, we only were required to gather 2,216 signatures in 180 days.
We submitted over 3,100 signatures, well over the required number as prescribed by the City Clerk in April of 2006, about 2 months after an intervening mayoral election in February (which was a runoff from the November 8, 2005 vote where no candidate received 50% + 1).
This isnt a situation where we were unable to gather signatures. It is a situation of being told what the rules and processes were by the City Clerk, following those rules to the letter, and still being screwed over by the courts.
Essentially, the Judge interpreted the charter to mean that proponents never truly know how many signatures they need to qualify the initiative until they are ready to turn the signatures in for a vote.
For example, you could start circulating based on an election that was four years ago, have that number readjusted in the current election cycle and then have that number readjusted again if that candidate who was elected were to die before taking office and thus requiring an additional election to fill the vacancy.
I hope that helps to better clear up what is going on in San Bernardino.
ping
NBC news story on this has a nice clip of MR. Turner being punched by one of the La Raz Thugs.
Thank you for the reply. I certainly think you have reason to be upset over the judges ruling, however 3100 signatures (2,217 were certified but whatever) seems puny for a city population of 200,000 when an immigration crackdown is supposedly demanded by 70% of American voters.
Sure. It is a puny number. That is why, if I decide to do it again, I am confident I will get the signatures.
The point is not the quantity of the number of signatures required...just the fact that we were told to get one number all along and we exceeded that number handily.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.