TUSTIN : Council Deadlocks on Election Dispute

With less than a week left until a Superior Court showdown over the City Council’s failure to approve details of the April 10 election, the council has deadlocked on whether to accept a compromise that would have ended the dispute.

Last week, City Clerk Mary Wynn sued the city in an effort to compel Councilmen John Kelly and Earl J. Prescott to approve details for the election to decide three council seats.

Kelly and Prescott then offered a compromise in which they asked the council to consider holding an April election to fill only former Councilman Ronald B. Hoesterey’s vacant seat with the remaining two positions to be filled in the November election.

Mayor Richard B. Edgar and Councilwoman Ursula E. Kennedy rejected the suggestion on the advice of City Atty. James G. Rourke, who said the Election Code would not permit that solution.

They also rejected a request by Kelly and Prescott to have the city pay for their legal defense in the lawsuit brought by Wynn.

Rourke said that although the city paid for Hoesterey’s legal defense against a suit filed by Kelly and Prescott, the city is not obligated to pay for the legal fees of Kelly and Prescott because their failure to approve election details was illegal.

“I intend to vote against (your legal defense) because in my judgment, you both committed a criminal act,” Edgar told Kelly and Prescott.

Kelly and Prescott say they were voting on principle because they disagree with the whole idea of an April election. “We as council members have the right to vote our beliefs,” Prescott declared.

A hearing on the suit has been scheduled for Friday in Orange County Superior Court, and a special City Council meeting has been scheduled for 7 p.m. that night. If the court orders the council to approve polling places, precincts and precinct boards for the election, that action will be taken at the Friday meeting.