The Morning Blend
Welcome
Complete Media Kit
HUACHUCA CITY — Facing a Friday deadline, the Town Council voted 5-0 in a special meeting Tuesday to take a political petition dispute to court.
In September, political opponents of Mayor George Nerhan collected petitions to recall him in the earliest possible election, slated for March. The problem is the opponents are four signatures short of the required 100.
“Basically, we have two legal opinions here which are at odds,” Town Attorney Mary Ryan advised the council Tuesday.
Ryan was referring to an opposing opinion that came from Deputy County Attorney Anne Carl, who advised the County Recorder’s Office to reject a second batch of petitions that would have filled the quota needed to recall the mayor.
 Huachuca City Mayor George Nerhan |
Ryan told the council, “My review of the statutes and my review of the actions that the town of Huachuca City had taken was that we processed everything appropriately.”
Ryan and Carl also discussed the issue, but the latter saw it differently.
“The law is not crystal clear on the issue,” Carl said when contacted after the council meeting. “At the same time, we felt we were in the right to refuse to look at the second group.”
She based her opinion on a review and interpretation of Arizona Revised Statutes. She informed Town Clerk Ron Armstrong of her legal opinion in a complex and detailed letter supporting her opinion. That letter is on file at the clerk’s office for those who may wish to read it.
Nerhan and Councilman Eric Wilkey were not present at Tuesday’s meeting.
The group leading the petition drive, which includes Mayor Pro Tem Dave Perry and council members Pat Woodruff and Ken Taylor, turned in two batches of signatures. Council members Gene McCullough and Donna Johnson supported the other three in two unanimous council votes Tuesday: one to discuss the issue, the second to take legal action on it.
“I am kind of dumbfounded on this whole thing,” Perry said during the discussion.
He had called the special meeting after Armstrong sought direction after being stymied by the conflicting legal opinions.
Perry, a veteran of political battles in Huachuca City, said he was “taken aback” by the snag in the Recorder’s Office.
“This is not my first run-through with this process,” Perry said.
Armstrong said he checked with the County Elections Department and was assured “not only could I send a second packet the Monday or Tuesday after the weekend, but that I was free to send literally a petition a day. They didn’t all have to come in the same envelope at the same time. One a day for the next 30 days.”
The council ordered Ryan to file a special action with the Superior Court of Cochise County, seeking a judicial review of the county recorder’s decision. She has to file that by Friday.
Armstrong hesitated but then told the council that he had learned Nerhan was present in the County Recorder’s Office “at the time the decision was made to forward them to the county attorney for advice. That individual (Nerhan) was part of this conversation, and to me that throws a great cloud over the validity of our election system.”
County Recorder Christine Rhodes was contacted after the meeting and said her office checks petitions “all the time.” She said she did not personally deal with the Nerhan petition process. Her deputy Lauri Leyvas did, but she was not available Tuesday to discuss it.
Rhodes noted that Nerhan deals with a lot of real estate business in her office.
“He’s known to all of us,” she said. As for the frequency of his visits, “It’s not a lot, but we all know George.”
“We’re a public office,” Rhodes said, adding Nerhan is not allowed to walk past the front counter.
Rhodes said the two attorneys needed to discuss the issue. When informed they had, and the matter was headed for a judicial review, Rhodes responded, “Well, that’s fine. We’ll go to court.”
Nerhan, doing business in Little Rock, Ark., was contacted by phone Tuesday evening.
He condemned the council’s action, calling it “an unauthorized expense” to task the town attorney with a politically-motivated purpose that will cost thousands of taxpayer dollars.
The rules of a recall election require that 25 percent of ballots cast in the election that installed the official is equal to the number of signatures required to recall that official. Four hundreds votes were cast in the mayoral election of 2005, in which Nerhan defeated Stuart Jantzen. Thus, 100 signatures are needed.
The turnout in the May 2007 election of council members saw far fewer ballots cast — a total of 31, according to Armstrong.
Thus, only eight signatures were required to launch recalls that were recently lodged against four council members: Johnson, McCullough, Perry and Woodruff. Those petitions were filed by Wilkey. Rhodes confirmed their filing Tuesday.
Herald/Review City Editor Ted Morris can be reached at 515-4614 or by e-mail at cityeditor@svherald.com.
D. G. Thomson wrote on Oct 24, 2008 11:32 AM: