TUSTIN : Legal Fees Soaring in Election Fracases

The legal bills are mounting in the escalating disputes over the City Council election April 10.

All four City Council members and the city clerk have individually hired lawyers to represent their interests in the fight that started when two councilmen refused earlier this year to approve a routine resolution to hire precinct workers and establish polling places for the April municipal elections.

City officials say they can’t predict how much the disputes will end up costing taxpayers.

“It could be $10,000, $20,000, $30,000,” City Manager William Huston said of the growing legal fees. “We just don’t know yet.”

Said Mayor Richard B. Edgar: “We’ll just have to wait until all the results of all the court cases are in and all the bills are submitted.”

Councilmen John Kelly and Earl J. Prescott were the first council members to hire attorneys in their defense against a lawsuit filed by City Clerk Mary Wynn. That action, filed by Robert Owen of Rutan & Tucker, sought to force the two councilmen to approve a resolution establishing election details.

After the council deadlocked on whether to foot the defense bill for Prescott and Kelly, Prescott hired Anthony Duffy of the national law firm McDermott, Will & Emery. Kelly retained Robert Destro, a former federal civil rights commissioner and law professor who flew from Washington for a hearing last week.

Edgar and Councilwoman Ursula E. Kennedy voted against using city money to pay for Prescott and Kelly’s attorneys, saying the two councilmen broke the law by voting against the resolution setting up the election.

City Atty. James G. Rourke, who has also been handling some details of the dispute, said the city will pay for Kelly and Prescott’s defense if the councilmen prevail in court.

Originally, Edgar and Kennedy said they did not want representation because they agreed with the suit. But after last Friday’s Superior Court decision in favor of Kelly and Prescott, they secured their own lawyers to present arguments in the city clerk’s appeal of the decision.

In a separate action concerning the April election, the city has already paid $3,600 to the law firm of Spencer and Covert to defend former Councilman Ronald B. Hoesterey against a suit filed by Kelly and Prescott. The two councilmen claim that Hoesterey was not living in Tustin last fall when he cast the decisive vote to move the city elections from November to April. Hoesterey subsequently resigned from the council.

Residents and city officials are critical of the city’s extended legal battles.

“I am appalled at what’s been going on,” said Carl Kasalek, chairman of Tustin Residents Action Committee, a group seeking to unseat Kelly. “John Kelly is actively pursuing the April campaign but is also spending taxpayer dollars to try to stop it.”

Prescott agrees the fees will be exorbitant.

“It’s unfortunate,” he said. “But they were directly caused by the illegal and arrogant action of letting Ronald Hoesterey vote on Nov. 20.” Prescott and Kelly allege that Hoesterey was not a legal resident when he voted last fall to move this year’s election from November to April.