HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD FOR ADOPTION 09-17-90G E N DWM�
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
September 71 1990
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COIINCIL
CITY ATTORNEY
NANCE FOR ADOPTION
9/.L7/90
Inter - Com
RECEIVED
y�p►oi�
ADMINISTRATION
SUBJECT: ELECTION LITIGATION; ORDINANCE NO. 1048
Despite the apparent resolution of the remaining election
litigation at the last Council meeting, it is my recommendation
that the Council proceed to have the second reading and adoption
of Ordinance No. 1048 at your next meeting. I believe it is
important that the adoption not be delayed.
1�1� a. I" --
JAMS G. ROURRE
City Attorney
JGR:kbg:R:9/7/90(a\1281.rr)(8)
cc: WH ("'O'
* 10/17/90
~•F
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 1048 - APRIL ELECTIONS
RECOMMENDATION:
FINANCE FOR ADOPTION
9/17/90
Inter - Com
M.O. - Ordinance No. 1048 have second reading by title only.
M.O. - Ordinance No. 1048 be passed and adopted (roll call vote).
BACKGROUND:
The following Ordinance No. 1048 had first reading and introduction at
the September 4, 1990 City Council meeting:
ORDINANCE NO. 1048 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 980 WHICH REQUIRED THE
CITY'S GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE CONSOLIDATED WITH THE STATEWIDE
GENERAL ELECTION HELD IN NOVEMBER OF EVEN NUMBERED YEARS PURSUANT TO
SECTION 36503.5 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE
Valerie Whiteman
Chief Deputy City Clerk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. 1048
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA REPEALING
ORDINANCE NO. 980 WHICH REQUIRED THE
CITY'S GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE
CONSOLIDATED WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL
ELECTION HELD IN NOVEMBER OF EVEN
NUMBERED YEARS PURSUANT TO SECTION
36503.5 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE
The City Council of the City of Tustin hereby finds and
determines as follows:
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1032 was duly and regularly adopted on
November 20, 1989, and
WHEREAS, certain legal actions have been filed in Orange
County Superior Court challenging the adoption of Ordinance No.
1032, including Case No. X618541, Earl Prescott, et al. v. City of
Tustin, et al., and Case No. 619899, Earl Prescott, et al. v. City
of Tustin, et al. (hereinafter "pending lawsuits"); and
WHEREAS, on April 2, 1990, the Orange County Superior Court,
per the Honorable David H. Brickner, ruled that Ordinance No. 1032
is valid, refused at that time to issue a writ of mandate or to
preliminarily and/or permanently enjoin the general election of the
City of Tustin then scheduled by Ordinance No. 1032 for April 10,
1990; and subsequently entered judgment in Case No. 619899 in favor
of the City of Tustin, the City Council of the City of Tustin and
the City Clerk of the City of Tustin; and
WHEREAS, a general election of the City of Tustin was duly and
regularly held on April 10, 1990 as called for by Ordinance No.
1032; and
WHEREAS, counsel for plaintiffs and petitioners in the pending
lawsuits have in open court stated that they do not now see,',
invalidation of the election held on April 10, 1990 and neither do
they seek to oust those counc_i.lmembers elected at that election,
but, nevertheless, plaintiff and petitioners continue to assert
that due to the alleged invalidity of Ordinance No. 1032 all future
general elections of the City of Tustin should be held in November
of even numbered years pursuant to former Ordinance No. 980, rather
than in April of even numbered years as called for pursuant to
Ordinance No. 1032; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tustin and the City
of Tustin remain convinced of the validity of Ordinance No. 1032,
and that it was properly and duly enacted; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tustin desires to
resolve the remaining dispute and pending lawsuits without the need
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13i
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
of continued, protracted, expensive litigation, and to that end
desire to reenact the operative provisions of Ordinance No. 1032;
and
WHEREAS, nothing in this Ordinance shall in any way be
construed as admission of any of the allegations in the pending
lawsuits:
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Tustin does
hereby ordain as follows:
Section 1: Ordinance No. 980 is hereby repealed.
Section 2: The City Clerk is directed to conduct the general
municipal election on the 2nd Tuesday in April of an even numbered
year, to canvass the return of the general municipal election, and
to otherwise conduct the election in all respects pursuant to the
provisions of Elections Code Section 22800, and following,
pertaining to municipal elections.
Section 3: The period to nominate candidates for the general
municipal election shall be as set forth in Elections Code Section
22836.
Section 4: The general municipal election following adoption
of this Ordinance and each municipal election thereafter shall be
held on the date for general municipal elections held in April of
even numbered years.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Tustin held on the day of , 19
Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk
Richard B. Edgar, Mayor