If proponents of ousting District Attorney John Sarsfield
undertake a full-blown recall campaign, it could set the stage for
a contentious and costly special election next year.
If proponents of ousting District Attorney John Sarsfield undertake a full-blown recall campaign, it could set the stage for a contentious and costly special election next year.
Head elections official John Hodges believes a special election would cost San Benito County as much, or more, than the October gubernatorial recall ballot – which totaled $113,000.
And with recent orders from the federal government to beef up minority resources, such as printing ballots in English and Spanish, that figure likely would rise even higher, he said.
“Oh boy, with our new rules and regulations with the feds, it could be real costly. It could be real costly,” Hodges said Thursday.
That prospect could put another dent in the county budget. Officials expect the county to break even this year by cutting programs across the board and pulling nearly $3 million from reserves. Though next year the county could face a similar, multi-million dollar shortfall.
One of several arguments from recall proponents, however, is that Sarsfield has and continues to cost the county in expensive litigation. Sarsfield recently agreed to mediate with two workers alleging he’s having an inner-office affair that’s caused a hostile workplace.
It’s among 10 reasons for his removal the “Committee to Recall John Sarsfield” stated in a “notice of intention” filed with the Election’s Office on Thursday. Proponent Bob Wilson served the district attorney with the same legally required notice Wednesday. He’s one of 22 supporters who signed the document.
Wilson on Thursday acknowledged a recall campaign would be a highly scrutinized and potentially quarrelsome process – in a county healing over the Measure G land use controversy. But he also thinks people would be “excited by the fact that something is actually going to be done” about Sarsfield. The district attorney didn’t immediately return a phone call Thursday.
“It’s a really big question,” Wilson said. “Do you really want this guy to stay in office long enough for the bad guys to figure out they can come into San Benito County and get off?”
The committee, meanwhile, realizes the strictness of state laws governing recall campaigns, Wilson said, such as deadlines and rigid requirements on signature petitions. By comparison, the campaign in 2003 to get Measure G on the March ballot was challenged in court because two mandated sentences were missing from its signature petition.
Wilson’s committee would have to gather 4,810 registered voters’ signatures to force a recall election. On the ballot, a recall of Sarsfield would require a majority vote. And like the governor’s race, voters would have the option to choose a replacement, too.
“We certainly would not want to start something like this and end up having it fizzling,” Wilson said.
Lindsey McWilliams has a good idea how stressful a district attorney recall campaign can be. He’s the elections official in Humboldt County. There, a recall attempt of District Attorney Paul Gallegos reached a ballot in March but failed 61 percent to 39 percent. A lumber company, which Gallegos sued years earlier over environmental laws, financed most of the effort.
McWilliams called the recall attempt a “very polarizing event.” Some Humboldt residents complained about treatment from signature gatherers during the recall campaign, he said. Humboldt County referred the complaints to the state’s voter fraud unit. He said that of that investigation: “As far as I know it’s still ongoing.”
“There was a lot of emotions,” McWilliams said of the Humboldt recall attempt in the county with a population of 126,000 people. “It’s just really stressful.”
It’s unclear what effect, if any, a recall campaign could have on local law enforcement – the agencies that interact regularly with the San Benito County District Attorney’s Office.
Hollister Police Chief Jeff Miller said potential distractions from a recall wouldn’t affect the day-to-day operations of the department. Sheriff Curtis Hill declined to comment this week on the matter.
“We’ve got a lot on our plate to deal with right now,” Miller said. “Now in the larger picture, certainly anything that disrupts services in the county, with the justice system, has an affect on the overall system.”
President of the local Sheriff’s Department deputy union, Mark Lima, said members haven’t discussed the recall issue. Hollister’s union head, Sgt. Ray Wood, could not be reached Thursday.
“We’re not going to take a stand on it, as far as I’m concerned,” Lima said.
