Mission Viejo deadline extension challenged as City Council vote changed – Orange County Register

When Mission Viejo leaders in 2020 decided to delay their plan to change the way voting is done in the city – after nearly two years of trying to implement a cumulative system – three the last council members served two years longer than the term for which they were elected.

Now, one resident is asking the state attorney general to allow his lawsuit to extend that two-year period to four years without a public vote. And some residents say they fear it could happen again, as Mission Viejo leaders finalize plans to transition to a county-by-county voting system.

But attorneys for Mission Viejo, who also represent the three council members being challenged, said the city did not introduce new rules. Since officials can’t do the job of cumulative voting — state officials say they will need legislative changes — existing city laws govern city council members’ terms were complied with, said City Attorney Bill Curley.

To settle a 2018 lawsuit against the city over its large-scale voting system, Mission Viejo leaders and the voting rights group that sued the city agreed cumulative voting was the best method to address the dilution of minority voters in the city. Under an accrual system, voters receive as many votes as the number of seats available and vote however they want – including as many votes for the same person. For the cumulative system, all City Council members will vote at the same time.

To regulate the terms of council members, city officials in 2018 planned to appoint three winners to office that year. only serve a term of two yearsso all five city leadership positions will be voted on in 2020, when the new voting system is scheduled to launch.

When those plans were delayed due to opposition from public officials, the terms of three council members – Wendy Bucknam, Greg Raths and Ed Sachs – were expanded by a vote of the City Council.

Curley said officials went back to an Orange County Superior Court judge and asked for more time for the cumulative voting system to roll out.

Because all five seats need to be put up for election by 2022, when city leaders are expected to finally adopt the new system, the two winners from the 2020 vote will serve. in two years. Elected that year were Trish Kelley and Brian Goodell.

Now Mission Viejo leaders have drop the idea of ​​cumulative voting In favor of the site-based system, some community members are questioning the term extensions for Raths, Sachs, and Bucknum, which they argue were decided without public input. they.

And because the terms would instead be compared in a county-based system, some doubt Kelley and Goodell will face a public vote in November.

That has yet to be decided, Curley said.

Cathy Palmer, who has lived in Mission Viejo since the 1980s, said the council’s decision to extend the terms of officials beyond what residents believe they are voting for is “disturbing”.

Palmer said she considers this to be breaking a “philosophical principle” by “taking away my fundamental right to choose who to represent me”.

Another resident, Michael Schlesinger, filed a petition with the state attorney general last month asking for legal opinions on whether Raths, Sachs and Bucknum can be sued to stay in office.

Lee Fink, the attorney representing Schlesinger, said that if allowed by the state’s top prosecutor, they would apply to the Orange County Superior Court “and ask for the three board members to be removed and their documents removed. room was declared vacant.”

“We hope that we can get this resolved by the courts to prevent the City Council from further breaching their obligations to the public and allowing them to only serve beyond their terms of office,” said Fink. speak.

The filing notes that, under an amended lawsuit settlement agreement issued in 2020, Judge Walter Shwarm ordered all five council seats to be put up for election in 2022.

But Curley said the two-year term for which council members are elected is based on a plan that the city will implement cumulative voting, “and when that ultimately isn’t feasible, especially because of the concerns of the public.” Secretary of State, then we’ve come up with a normal, if you will, to be consistent with current city and state law, “which sets councilmember terms at four years,” he said.

“And so we don’t always make things up.”

He said that although it had been mentioned in public meetings that the move to county-based voting would mean three candidates in the vote in 2022 and two in 2024, officials simply Simply forward the standard process, but that can be changed.

“We’re telling you what’s on the books, but books can change in a month,” he said.

When the City Council passed an ordinance that officially implemented the county election process and the official map etched the city into geo-voting districts, “absence is unconstitutional, they can do pretty much anything.” seemed right for the community at the time,” said Curley.

That could mean moving Kelley and Goodell’s terms to 2024, he said. The council could, like some other cities that have switched to county-based voting, also choose to elect two seats to two-year terms in November to delay voting for the future.