|
Council squashes term-limit initiative |
|
|
|
Written by John Saiz / Patterson Irrigator
|
|
Thursday, 07 August 2008 |
An initiative that would put term limits on Patterson politicians will not be
appearing on the November ballot, following a 5-0 vote by the Patterson City
Council on Tuesday.
The council decided to reject the initiative based on the
recommendation of City Attorney George Logan, who said organizers did not follow
California election law when collecting more than 1,000 signatures from
Patterson voters.
Logan said a public notice never ran in the Irrigator, and
the petition included an unauthorized summary.
 Worley
Initiative organizer Donna
Worley said a notice in the Patterson Irrigator is not necessary and the summary
she used was valid. After she presented her arguments to the council Tuesday, a
slew of people spoke against the initiative and questioned Worley’s
motives.
“(Worley) came to town not as a concerned citizen, but with an
agenda,” area resident Jeff Arambel said.
Applause broke out after his
comments.
People also accused Worley of being associated with the proposed
West Park industrial development in Crows Landing. Patterson City Council has
been an opponent of the 7.5-square mile proposal.
During the meeting, one man
even took up a collection to pay for Worley to move out of Patterson.
“It’s
up to $700 and a U-Haul,” J.P. Smith told Worley shortly after the
meeting.
Mayor Becky Campo did not allow her an opportunity to respond to the
comments made about her.
“I might lose the election, but I’m not letting her
speak again,” Campo said.
After the meeting, Worley said she is not being
paid to be in Patterson, though California Term Limits Legal Defense Fund has
been “sponsoring” her efforts to bring term limits to Patterson.
She would
not specify what monies the defense fund had provided.
“It’s not my business
how (California Term Limits Defense Fund) handled sponsorship for this,” Worley
said.
Kevin Spillane, a spokesman for California Term Limits Defense Funds,
said he didn’t know the specific amount his organization has given to term-limit
efforts in Patterson but said, “We do not spend a great deal of money.”
The
organization will typically hire signature gatherers and pay administrative fees
associated with filing an initiative, Spillane said.
As for paying Worley to
be a political operative in Patterson, “If she’s a paid operative, I don’t know
where she’s being paid from,” he said.
The initiative Worley proposed would
put term limits on Patterson City Council and the mayor. Now, the mayor can
serve an unlimited number of terms. Worley is proposing restricting local
representatives to two terms.
Spillane said his organization supports term
limits throughout the state because they prevent small groups from holding onto
power for extended period of times.
“When there’s an accumulation of power
over time, there is abuse of that power,” Spillane said.
While the audience
raised questions about Worley’s true motives, the comments from the council
focused on procedural issues.
“These are the laws that have to be abided by,”
said Councilwoman Dejeune Shelton.
California law states organizers must
declare their intent to circulate a petition for municipal elections in the
adjudicated newspaper of general circulation in that area. City Attorney Logan
said because of that, the announcement needed to appear in the Irrigator, which
it did not. The Irrigator became adjudicated in the 1950s.
Worley counters
that the announcement she had published in the Modesto Bee satisfies the
requirement.
The other procedural dispute was over the summary that was
included with the petition. According to state law, once an initiative is
presented to the city, the city attorney must write a title and an impartial
summary.
Worley said Logan never provided her with a summary and delayed
responding to her at every turn. What he did eventually give, she said, was a
one-sentence title that did not fully explain the initiative.
So Worley
included a summary that she had presented earlier to the city. She said it
qualifies as a valid summary because the city attorney never rejected the
summary.
For now, the initiative appears to have been squashed. However,
Worley said taking the city to court over the matter is still a possibility.
“We have no choice but to declare the petition defective,” Councilman Sam
Cuellar said.
To reach John Saiz at the Irrigator, call 892-6187 or e-mail
him at
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
I also have to question what Mr. Spillane's organization is doing supporting Ms. Worley's initiative. Term limits at the state and national level are a good thing and I could see Mr. Spillane's organization supporting that, but was does Mr. Spillane know about Patterson. And how can he support a term limit measure in Patterson without knowing what support there is in town or the credibility of the petition's supporters.