Judge Orders That Pratt Be Given Place on Council Ballot

A Superior Court judge on Friday ordered that San Diego City Council candidate Wes Pratt be listed on next month’s ballot despite his failure to secure enough valid signatures on nominating petitions--a decision that could enable other disqualified contenders to also try to revive their candidacies.

Ruling that 4th District candidate Pratt had “substantially complied with the intent” behind the nominating petitions, despite falling 21 names short of the 200-signature requirement, Judge Richard Huffman ordered city election officials to include Pratt’s name on the Sept. 15 primary ballot.

That decision could dramatically alter the dynamics of the 4th District campaign, because Pratt, now on leave from his position as administrative assistant to county Supervisor Leon Williams, had been widely viewed as one of the race’s front-runners before his disqualification. In his absence, the Rev. George Stevens and Marla Marshall were considered the primary’s odds-on favorites--a perception shaken, if not shattered, by Friday’s ruling.

“I’m elated, I feel vindicated and I’m glad to be back in the race,” Pratt said after Friday’s hearing. “We felt we were right all along. This is a signal that you just don’t roll over when something goes wrong. Now, we’re back and I think we’ll be able to come back all the way.”

While Huffman emphasized that his ruling dealt solely with the “special circumstances” of Pratt’s case, city officials admitted that the decision opens the way for six other candidates disqualified last month for failing to comply with the signature requirement to seek reinstatement on the ballot.

“I’d say it’s not only possible, but probable that some of the others will try to do the same thing because the facts aren’t that different,” City Clerk Charles Abdelnour said shortly after the decision.

Within hours of Friday’s court action, other disqualified candidates prepared to go to court.

“I’m on my way to court!” 4th District hopeful Gloria Tyler-Mallery said upon being informed of Huffman’s ruling.

Another disqualified 4th District candidate, businessman Richard (Tip) Calvin, added: “If that’s the case, we’ll be right behind!” Both Calvin and Tyler-Mallery, a publicist and radio broadcaster, had launched write-in campaigns after their disqualification.

What Might Have Been

However, Jesse Macias, a former television news reporter who was a major figure in the 8th District race until his disqualification, said Friday that he will not appeal that decision, but instead will stand by his recent endorsement of candidate Michael Aguirre.

“I’m not prepared to shift gears for the second time in two weeks,” said Macias, who collected 385 signatures, 205 of which were ruled invalid. “I’ve given Mike my word and I’m going to stick to that. But this sure raises a lot of provocative what-might-have-been thoughts in my mind.”

Three other minor candidates also were disqualified in the 6th District contest--investment broker Keith Behner, consultant Robert McCullough and schoolteacher Mark Potocki. None could be reached Friday, but McCullough said earlier that he planned to pursue a write-in campaign.

Whether Tyler-Mallery, Calvin or any other erstwhile council candidates succeed in having their names placed on the ballot depends on their ability to convince a judge that the circumstances surrounding their disqualifications parallel the facts found in Pratt’s case.

“Judge Huffman was very specific that his ruling was limited to Wes Pratt,” Chief Deputy City Atty. Ted Bromfield said. “It’s our position that the ruling is not applicable to the other (candidates) unless a judge makes a finding of special circumstances in those cases.”

With the primary ballots already printed and absentee voting scheduled to begin on Monday, city officials decided not to appeal Huffman’s ruling. It will cost the city about $9,000 to reprint the 4th District ballots to include Pratt’s name, Abdelnour said, adding that the price tag could rise if other candidates later qualify by a court order.

Pratt had submitted 238 signatures on his nominating petitions, but the San Diego County voter registrar’s office ruled that only 179 were valid, 21 short of the required 200 names of registered district voters established by the San Diego City Council earlier this year. The signatures declared invalid, a registrar’s spokesman said, came from persons who either were not registered to vote or registered at an address other than that listed on the petitions.

Arguing that he had “substantially complied” with the law’s intent, Pratt last week asked the city clerk’s office to include him on the ballot. Based on a legal opinion from Bromfield, who, noting that Pratt could still run as a write-in candidate, wrote that the disqualification “does not infringe on any constitutional right of Mr. Pratt to seek office,” the clerk’s office denied that request.

That set the stage for Friday’s court hearing, in which Huffman accepted the very arguments that the city attorney’s office had rejected.

No Magic Number

“There’s nothing magic about the number 200, which was arrived at in a somewhat arbitrary fashion,” Huffman said. “The stated purpose of the law is to have candidates out on the street, meeting people. By submitting 20% more signatures than required, Mr. Pratt satisfied that intent.”

Huffman also emphasized that Pratt “diligently pursued administrative remedies” by asking the clerk’s office to reinstate him before going to court--a step that some of the other disqualified candidates have not yet taken.

The revival of Pratt’s candidacy--and the possibility that Calvin and Tyler-Mallery may join him on the 4th District ballot--substantially transforms the complexion of the eight-candidate race for the seat being vacated by Councilman William Jones, who plans to resign to attend Harvard Business School this fall. The top two vote-getters in the district primary, which also includes three long shots--community activist De De McClure, design engineer Warren Nielsen and U.S. postal worker Robert Maestas--will face each other in the November citywide general election.

Marshall, however, said that Friday’s developments “won’t change a thing” about her campaign, and she predicted that Pratt may have difficulty recovering from the three-week hiatus created by his disqualification.

“He’s been on hold since last month and there are only four weeks left,” said Marshall, the former administrative assistant to Councilwoman Gloria McColl. “That’s got to kind of take the wind out of his sails. But we didn’t do anything different when he couldn’t get the voters to put him on the ballot and, now that he’s found a judge to do it, we’ll continue to do exactly what we’ve been doing.”

Pratt conceded that the three-week layoff “left me with some ground to make up,” but professed confidence that “we’ll be back to full steam by early next week.”

“The phone’s been ringing off the hook,” Pratt said late Friday. “My supporters are ready to pick up right where we left off. I think the momentum is going to start swinging back in our favor.”

Before Friday’s hearing, some of Pratt’s prominent supporters expressed concern that, regardless of the outcome, the politically embarrassing episode--in particular, his failure to comply with the relatively simple signature requirement--had irreparably undermined his campaign. Pratt, however, discounted that theory.

“I think what this really shows is that I was a victim of a bad law,” Pratt said. “It slowed us down a little, but I think we’re going to be all right. This could give us a real boost down the stretch.”