Illegal Immigration Relief Act" not likely to appear on ballot
By Kelly Rayburn, Staff Writer




• Read more articles
• See more video
• Hear more audio

• Share your views


SAN BERNARDINO - Voters may never cast ballots on a controversial initiative that has drawn national headlines and divided the city on illegal immigration issues.
The future of the so-called "City of San Bernardino Illegal Immigration Relief Act" is in jeopardy after Superior Court Judge A. Rex Victor ruled Monday that its proponent, city resident Joseph Turner, had not collected the needed number of signatures to force a vote.

Turner and other backers of the initiative will be given a 10-day window to collect the thousands of additional signatures that are needed, but Turner said he is not likely to pursue that possibility.

The initiative would have banned city-funded day-labor centers, punished those who did business or rented to illegal immigrants and required that city communications be done only in English.

But the legal challenge, brought on by lawyers representing San Bernardino resident Florentino Garza, did not concern the tenets of the proposal, but rather whether it ever should have qualified for a vote.

At issue was whether Turner should have used the city's November 2001 election or its February 2006 election as a benchmark for the number of signatures needed.

Victor determined that under the City Charter's "clear and unambiguous" direction, the more recent election should have been used and that City Clerk Rachel Clark erred in concluding that the signatures Turner handed in were enough to force a vote. "The City Clerk's May 4, 2006, notice of sufficiency is invalid," the judge said.

Victor's ruling was hailed by opponents of the Turner proposal, who described the initiative as a poor priority for a city wrestling with one of the nation's highest crime rates.

Others said the judge's ruling was a blow to democracy and especially to the more than 3,000 residents who signed petitions in favor of the proposal.

Turner characterized the ruling as the work of an `'activist judge taking the law into his own hands."

"When you put a lot of work into something and see an activist judge throw it out, it is disappointing," he said.

He said getting the signatures he needed in 10 days would be nearly impossible. He would need more than double the 2,217 that were ultimately certified.

Instead, Turner said he would start from scratch and try to qualify an anti-illegal immigration measure "more draconian" than the first, and that he would continue "dropping the hammer on illegal immigrants in our city."

The much-talked-about initiative drew national attention to San Bernardino. Tensions boiled over at the courthouse Friday, when a member the Riverside-based National Alliance for Human rights slapped Turner after Turner told him, "Your mother can go (bleep) herself."

The man, identified by sheriff's officials as Robert Ballantyne, was hit with a misdemeanor battery charge.

Monday was calmer. Those who attended the court proceeding were immediately ushered outside the courthouse. Once outside, Turner looked at Armando Navarro, the coordinator of the Riverside-based National Alliance and one of Turner's chief political foes, and asked how they should deal with the media.

"You want to take turns?" he asked.

"Go ahead," Navarro answered, offering him the first go at things.

It's not all Kumbaya between the two, however. Not at all.

Navarro and Mari Ann Gonzales, another member of the Alliance, said they would seek a court-ordered restraining order against Turner to keep him 100 feet from their members.

Turner's response: "On what grounds?"

"I think it's funny," he said, later. "All these people want a restraining order against me, but I'm not the one resorting to violence or being aggressive."

Hoopla aside, Victor's ruling turned on a narrow question of law.

Under the charter, an initiative proponent can force a vote by collecting signatures equal to 30 percent of the votes cast in the last election in which a mayor was elected.

Turner began collecting signatures in November, but did not turn them in until April, after the February election. The February mayoral runoff between Mayor Pat Morris and City Attorney James F. Penman had relatively high turnout, particularly compared to the November 2001 election, when former mayor Judith Valles ran unopposed.

Clark consulted state election code in determining that the 2001 election should be used as the benchmark.

But Victor ultimately agreed with Garza's attorneys that based on a reading of the Charter, consulting state law was not necessary or warranted. Penman, who made oral arguments himself on Friday in defense of Clark's decision, said he was not surprised by the ruling.



"I think the outcome was what we had anticipated it would be," Penman said. "I think the City Attorney's office did the job we were elected to do, which is to make the best possible argument on behalf of the city and I think that was done."



Turner, meanwhile, appears to be out of legal options.

Penman said Clark does not want to appeal the decision and that he would recommend the City Council not appeal the decision.



Opinion on the council was split about what the ruling meant for the city.

"At a time when voter turnout is so low and voter apathy is so high," said 5th Ward Councilman Chas Kelley, "this thing, this decision today, I think is going to increase voter apathy and ensure that voter turnout is even lower, because the 3,000-plus residents who signed that petition are going to throw up their hands and say, `Gee whiz, those politicians do whatever they want after we elect them and when we say we want something done a judge legislates from the bench and throws it out.' "

Third Ward Councilman Gordon McGinnis, by contrast, said the city could not afford the initiative financially and that enforcement of immigration laws should be left to the federal government.

"It's not something the city could enforce even if it wanted to," he said.

And he added, "This city needs to concentrate on crime-fighting."