DATE: June 14, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dominic Lazzaretto, City Manager
By: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
SUBJECT: CITY PROVISION OF LEGAL DEFENSE TO COUNCIL MEMBER
DANIELSON CONCERNING QUO WARRANTO APPLICATION
Recommendation: Authorize the City to Defend Council Member Danielson in this Matter
SUMMARY
On June 8, 2022, the Office of the Arcadia City Clerk received service of a Notice to Michael Danielson (the Notice”) of Application for Leave to Sue (the “Application). The Notice and Application were filed with the Office of the Attorney General for the State of California by HQH Chinese American Equalization Association and Arcadia Voters Rights Group (the “Relators”).
This process, also known as “quo warranto,” is required to be pursued by those challenging as unlawful an individual occupying a public office. In such instances, an application must first be filed with the Attorney General for permission to sue the office holder. The Attorney General must then make certain findings in order to authorize such a challenge to be filed in court. The defendant office holder has the right to file with the Attorney General a response in opposition to such an application.
Separately, but in pending litigation involving the City which has direct relevance to the Notice and Application, the Relators recently served the City with a Petition for Writ of Mandate (the “Writ Petition”). The Writ Petition seeks a Court Order to compel the City to rescind its Ordinance adopting a map for new Council districts (the “District Map Ordinance”), which was required by the California Fair Maps Act. The Writ Petition also seeks to have the Court invalidate the City Council’s appointment of Council Member Danielson to fill a Council vacancy, and to invalidate all votes of Council Member Danielson including his vote to adopt the District Map Ordinance.
Special Counsel selected by the City to represent the City in the Writ Petition has indicated that a response to the Notice and Application must be filed on Council Member Danielson’s behalf by June 21, 2022.
City Provision of Legal Defense to Council Member Danielson June 14, 2022
DISCUSSION
The Application challenges the appointment of Council Member Danielson unanimously made by the City Council (by a vote of 4-0). The Application does not allege that Council Member Danielson personally acted improperly regarding his appointment. Rather than resulting from an act of Council Member Danielson himself, the challenge in the Application ultimately relates to an action taken by the City Council – that of appointing him. Since the issues raised in the Writ Petition impact the question of causing rescission of the District Map Ordinance, and include a challenge to Council Member Danielson’s appointment, the Application is a matter of interest and concern to the City, not merely to Council Member Danielson individually.
It should be emphasized how intertwined the Notice and Application are with the previously filed Writ Petition. The facts and legal theories, and the City’s defenses, are closely interrelated between the two. So this is a matter about which the City Council may reasonably determine that the public interest and necessity merit the City providing to Council Member Danielson the defense against the Application, since the defense in the Writ Petition of the validity of the City Council’s action to adopt the District Map Ordinance depend on it.
Under the specific facts involved in this quo warranto proceeding, as alleged in the Application, and for the reasons set forth above, it would be reasonable and appropriate for the City Council to authorize the provision of a legal defense to Council Member Danielson in the quo warranto process, including responding to the Application.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed action does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), and it can be seen with certainty that it will have no impact on the environment. Thus, this matter is exempt under CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City to defend Council Member Danielson in this matter, and to have Special Counsel representing the City in the Writ Petition do so.