Judge orders special election in March for 3 citizen-led Newport Beach measures
- Share via
An Orange County Superior Court judge has ordered Newport Beach to schedule a special election for three ballot measures in March after the city canceled the original court-ordered Nov. 3 vote.
For the first time since Election Day, Judge Julianne Bancroft weighed in on the scrapped election for the measures that sought reforms on councilmember term limits, single-member districts and transparency while reviving the vote for March 2.
“The previous orders of this court required the city of Newport Beach to place four measures on the ballot on November 3, nine days ago,” Bancroft said during Thursday morning’s status hearing. “How many of those measures were actually on the ballot last Tuesday?”
Kristen Rogers, an attorney representing Newport Beach, acknowledged that a measure proposing an amendment to the city’s housing plan appeared on the consolidated ballot, but the three other measures were not on a separate ballot.
The city says materials needed from the California Secretary of State’s office in order to run the special mail-in election have not been received by the ballot printing vendor and that more information is also needed from the county registrar’s office.
She argued that Newport Beach did everything it could to comply with Bancroft’s Sept. 2 court order, but that the Orange County registrar of voters and the California secretary of state’s office did not provide requested assistance for the city to administer the special election, including authorizing the ballot watermarks and tint required by state law.
“Without ballots, you can’t conduct an election, and that’s the position that we found ourselves in,” Rogers said.
Navi Dhillon, an attorney representing the Newport Beach Stewardship Assn., argued the city did everything it could to not comply with the court order.
“What brought us here is a series of calculated decisions by the city to frustrate a local vote,” he said.
“I’m not surprised that we’re here,” Dhillon added. “They’ve achieved their goal in one sense … which was they did not want to have all these ballots on November 3.”
Newport Beach challenged the measures in court earlier this year and argued petitioners improperly published public notices in the Orange County Reporter instead of the Daily Pilot.
Bancroft rejected the argument and overrode the Newport Beach City Council’s original decision to schedule the measures for the November 2028 general election.
The measures in question could change how councilmembers are elected, while pledging more transparency in city government.
Measure P proposes a two-term limit for councilmembers. Measure Q asks that only voters in a council district decide who represents it, as opposed to a citywide vote. Measure R seeks changes to the city’s charter in the name of greater transparency.
Newport Beach hired consultants and contracted with vendors to put the measures on a mail-in ballot only election, but canceled the scheduled Nov. 3 vote 11 days before Election Day — and after a series of legal appeals failed.
Voters in Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, Costa Mesa and Fountain Valley weighed in on candidates and measures related to housing, business license fees and term limits.
During Thursday’s hearing, Dhillon suggested Bancroft set a new special election date after hearing Rogers claim that the city’s correspondence with the registrar and secretary of state’s office, so far, has not confirmed a workable election date for the future.
He also wanted the judge to consider a separate date for a trial sometime after the special election on the question of sanctions, damages and a finding of contempt against the city for not administering the original Nov. 3 court-ordered election.
On the city’s behalf, Rogers pushed for a court-appointed judicial referee to determine a special election date.
“Why should a referee tell you what that date is instead of me?” Bancroft asked. “Why do I need a referee in between you and me?”
“Only on the factual question of when this election can occur, that’s it,” Rogers said.
When it became apparent that the city’s arguments did not sway Bancroft, Rogers asked for the special election to be delayed until April 6 to avoid what she previously called another “groundhog day” scenario.
But Bancroft issued a ruling at the end of the hearing that set the special election for March 2 and ordered city officials to take all necessary steps to ensure the vote is carried out.
She also ordered that NBSA’s attorneys be copied on the city’s correspondence with the registrar and secretary of state’s office on matters related to scheduling the ballot measures.
The court will conduct an evidentiary hearing regarding possible sanctions, damages and contempt at a date to be scheduled after the March 2 special election. It will consider Newport Beach’s conduct leading up to the vote.
“It is apparent to me that the city dragged its feet, whether it was intentional or not intentional, I don’t know that yet,” Bancroft said. “But I do know that … it was very clear that these [measures] were supposed to be on the ballot last week, and they were not.”
