Federal appeals court ruling affects all future recall attempts;
Hodges says no matter
Had any of several recent recall attempts in San Benito County
succeeded, they likely would be overturned following a Nov. 23
ruling by a federal appeals court.
Contrary to statements made by San Benito elections head John
Hodges, recall petitions must be bilingually written, the court
ruled.
Federal appeals court ruling affects all future recall attempts; Hodges says no matter
Had any of several recent recall attempts in San Benito County succeeded, they likely would be overturned following a Nov. 23 ruling by a federal appeals court.
Contrary to statements made by San Benito elections head John Hodges, recall petitions must be bilingually written, the court ruled.
The recalls likely would have been voided because the signature-gathering process was not bilingual. Moreover, according to the district attorney, Hodges could even be removed from his position and the federal government could take over his elections department because he might have violated the terms of a federal order issued to the county in May 2003 that required the elections head to make all elections material bilingual. Hodges repeatedly said earlier this year that recall petitions did not have to be bilingual, and he accepted English-only petitions into his office.
“There goes another mistake from the elections office,” offered former Hollister Mayor Brian Conroy, who helped organize a recall to oust Supervisor Jaime De La Cruz.
Conroy said his group called off their recall just weeks before their deadline in May for two reasons: 1) petitioners had received anonymous threats and, 2) they believed their effort, had it been successful in ousting De La Cruz, would have been voided because it wasn’t properly bilingual. Conroy said they hadn’t received proper instructions from the elections office on how to make the recall bilingual.
Conroy added that he and his fellow recall supporters were concerned about Hodges’ public statements that the election code didn’t call for bilingual recall petitions. Before making their decision, the group sent a letter to the Department of Justice voicing their concerns.
“We knew that had we been successful in the recall effort it would have been overturned,” Conroy said. “They [the elections office] weren’t requiring it. I even asked [County Counsel] Claude Biddle about it. He recommended we carry two petitions around, which, of course, is illegal. It all has to be on one sheet. He had no understanding of the issue.”
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on a long-awaited case in Orange County that challenged a previous court decision allowing recall petitions to be in English only. The appeals court ruled that all elections material, including recall petitions, must be in both Spanish and English in order to uphold the 1965 Voter Rights Act. The appeals court ruling reversed the recall of Santa Ana School Board District member Nativo Lopez, who also is the president of the national Mexican American Political Association. Lopez appealed the case against him in May.
The court’s decision reads, in part:
“Holding that these bilingual provisions do not apply to recall petitions would deny minority language speakers the right to fully participate in the electoral process by depriving them of the ability to consider the written arguments for and against a particular recall target. Such a result runs counter to the very purpose of Congress in remedying minority language discrimination in voting.”
The ruling flies in the face of what San Benito County elections head John Hodges has said on numerous occasions about recall petitions submitted to his office. In May and June, Hodges insisted that neither the elections codes nor the federal consent decree from the Department of Justice issued to San Benito after the contentious 2003 supervisors’ election required recall petitions to be bilingual.
Hodges denies ever saying that recall petitions didn’t have to be bilingual and insists his department has followed the consent decree to the letter.
“I’m not quite so sure I said that because I can’t remember saying that,” Hodges said Tuesday afternoon. “I know I did what we were supposed to do. I know we have followed elections code, elections forms, and the consent decree. We’re sticking right to it.”
DOJ voting rights officers in Washington, D.C., were tipped off about the county’s lack of bilingual elections material during elections in December 2002, mostly by concerned members of the local League of United Latin American Citizens. Before and after the feds issued the decree, the county swarmed with DOJ agents at every polling station in Hollister during the March 2003 primary and subsequent elections. Had the Board of Supervisors not accepted the conditions of the decree in June, the county would have faced a $5 million fine and lawsuit from the federal government.
Voting rights officials from the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., said they had no comment on the matter.
However, District Attorney John Sarsfield says Hodges could be facing contempt of court and the federal Department of Justice could consider taking over his elections department. In addition, the county itself could be facing a fine for violating the federal consent decree issued in June of 2003, which forced the county to hire a full-time bilingual elections coordinator and tighten up regulations at voting polls.
“The consequences for violating a court order is to fashion additional remedies to the order,” said Sarsfield, who has been watching the Lopez appeals case closely. “Just like in the original agreement, the county had to hire additional people (for the elections department) to do the original remedies, and obviously it hasn’t worked. So the next step is to take it over completely. If they have to, the feds can take over the elections department. Of course, the county would still have to foot the bill for the reorganization of the department.
“It’s potentially really bad,” added Sarsfield.
Hodges said his critics are blowing the upshot of the appeals court ruling out of proportion, and adamantly denies any wrongdoing. He also scoffed at the idea that the feds could take over his office.
“There’s no way they’re going to take over the elections department,” Hodges said. “On what issue? And what code? The bottom line is the elections department has been investigated by all arms of the government and we’ve always come out ahead.”
After the March 2003 supervisors’ election between Bob Cruz and De La Cruz, investigators from the Secretary of State’s office stepped in and eventually reported they found some 14 ballots, many which were absentee, that should not have been counted in the hotly argued race. Hodges had counted them anyway, and De La Cruz won by 10 absentee ballot votes. The state stopped short of overturning the race and many believe it was because of the scandals that then-Secretary of State Kevin Shelley was embroiled in. Shelley resigned several months after the state made its report on San Benito.
Sarsfield said that new Secretary of State Bruce McPherson is keeping an eye on the election blunders that have emanated from San Benito in recent years. Calls to the state office were not returned.
Hodges said his department wouldn’t be so closely scrutinized had it not been for “the media.”
“I feel real good about my department,” Hodges said. “I think it’s one of the best ones in all of California.”
In early summer, San Juan Bautista Councilmember Chuck Geiger and Mayor Art Medina were the targets of a recall organized by town activist Rebecca McGovern, an effort that ultimately failed for lack of qualifying signatures. From the beginning, Geiger challenged the process for not being bilingual and wrote letters of concern to many governmental agencies, including Hodges’ office, the DOJ in Washington and the California Secretary of State’s office.
Geiger laughed out loud when he heard about the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision.
“I was ready to challenge it myself in court,” Geiger said. “Fortunately, over 70 percent of the people of San Juan Bautista would not sign the recall. San Benito County needs to wake up and realize our demographics are changing. This county tends to lag in election reform.”
Sarsfield said that despite Hodges’ denials, it is important to not lose sight of the main issue.
“San Benito County was sued by the feds for trampling on the rights of Spanish-speaking voters,” he said. “That’s what this is about.”
