 |
 -0 |
 |
|
||||||||
 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
|
Recall foes filing suit The class-action lawsuit, the first legal salvo by anti-recall forces, is expected to be filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of California voters and taxpayers by two lawyers with strong Democratic Party ties. It will name as defendants another Democrat, Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, and top elections officials in three large counties, Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego. The director of Rescue California, the group leading the recall campaign, called the lawsuit "laughable." The recall effort has been driven by discontent over the state's record budget deficit and recent energy crisis. "Gray Davis can't explain or defend his record, so he's resorting to a clearly cynical and frivolous lawsuit to try to slow us down," David Gilliard said. If successful, the suit could sidetrack the process election officials are now using to determine whether enough valid signatures have been turned in to trigger an election. As many as 3,000 paid workers and more than 150,000 volunteers circulated petitions among voters, according to recall organizers. In a conference call Monday with reporters, lawyers Wylie Aitken and Paul Kiesel said that Republican-led recall supporters had bused in paid signature gatherers from out of state, put them up in motels and told them to claim they were California residents even if they had no intention of living in the state. The lawyers declined to release advance copies of the suit, but during the news conference alleged that some paid signature gatherers had felony records, were not registered California voters or did not really live in the state, any of which could disqualify them from collecting signatures. Aitken, who said he had used a private investigator to flesh out his findings, also claimed to have videotape of blank recall petitions that had been prematurely signed by witnesses, then left unattended for supporters to sign, a scenario that could make those petitions invalid. The plaintiffs hope a judge will force Shelley to instruct counties that they cannot validate signatures until they have verified the legal standing of circulators. They also argue they should have access to all circulators' names in order to conduct an independent investigation. "This fabrication will be exposed," Aitken said. Shelley offered no hint as to his thoughts on the lawsuit. He issued this one-sentence response: "I will continue to provide guidance based on the law, not the interests of one side or the other." It was also not clear whether the courts would necessarily consider the petitions themselves invalid if circulators failed to meet legal requirements. Previously, Shelley's office has said it would not be inclined to throw out petitions if voters signed them in good faith. "A California resident should not be punished if in fact the paid signature gatherer is in violation of California law," said Shelley spokeswoman Terri Carbaugh. "We do care if in fact any paid circulator is in violation of the election code," Carbaugh added. "If we become aware of any individual who crosses that line, we would immediately refer that case to a district attorney." Recall proponents said Monday they had submitted between 1.6 million and 1.7 million signatures to county election offices; the law requires at least 897,158 valid signatures in order to set a recall election. To be valid, signatures must come from registered voters, and voters may sign only once.
"If they've turned in 1.6 million signatures, but 1 million were turned in by people who did not have the ability to
|
|
|
