The effort to remove Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price from office took a step forward Tuesday when the county Board of Supervisors accepted the certification of signatures to place a recall on an upcoming ballot.
After a nearly four-hour hearing featuring more than three hours of ardent public comment, the supervisors voted to essentially confirm the finding of county Registrar of Voters Tim Dupuis that proponents gathered enough valid signatures — 74,757 — to place the recall of Price on a ballot.
The board also voted to schedule a special meeting on May 14 to set a date for such an election and to decide if they want to call a special election or consolidate the recall with the November general election.
“Our office’s preference, for a number of reasons, would be for you to consolidate,” Dupuis said.
Consolidation could save county millions
Firstly, the cost to run a special election would be between $15 million and $20 million, whereas folding the recall into the November election would cost about $4 million, he said.
Also, a special election would “compete for resources” with the general election, potentially leaving the county short on equipment and voting centers in November, he said.
“And I do want to make the board aware that there have been times when we have elections that get litigated, that judges have told us that we have to hold on to the equipment and not decommission it,” Dupuis said. “And that would, if we were in a special election and we were told to hold on to any of the critical equipment for running an election, it would put at risk our availability of resources and equipment for the consolidated election.”
Dupuis’ preference runs counter to the wishes of recall supporters, however, who have long said they’d prefer a special election be held as soon as possible.
Chris Moore, campaign manager for the anti-Price group Save Alameda for Everyone, said delaying a recall election longer than necessary will cost the county tax revenue as businesses close over crime concerns and people do their shopping and dining in other counties, in addition to the financial and emotional costs borne by crime victims, several of whom gave impassioned testimony Tuesday.
“The will of the people want to see this vote come to an election and they want a special election as soon as possible and that is what SAFE is asking,” Moore said, adding they’d like to see an election in July or August.
Both supporters and opponents of the recall have leveled criticism at Dupuis for perceived missteps and a lack of transparency while navigating the recall rules.
Opponents allege Dupuis failed to follow county election rules that say he had just 10 days to certify the signatures and that recall supporters were inappropriately allowed to use signature gatherers who don’t live in Alameda County.
Complicating matters is the fact that in March, county voters passed Measure B, a charter amendment that changes the recall rules to align with state election laws and it is unclear which should apply in this case since recall supporters started their signature gathering prior to the March election.
Critics say Dupuis variously applied state rules at times and county rules at times, adding confusion to an already complicated process.
Price: ‘This is irresponsible’
Price said Tuesday that the supervisors should have invalidated the signatures and prevented the recall from moving forward.
“The most unfortunate part is the citizens of Alameda County will be impacted by these actions. Today’s vote attempts to thwart their right to have who they duly elected in office,” Price said in a press release. “Additionally, the county already faces a $54 million budget gap, and the Board’s decision could add $20 million more debt to that shortfall. This is irresponsible. A special election should not even be on the table, this should take place on Nov. 5 during the general election.”
“I think ultimately this feels like it’s going to end up in court one way or the other.” Supervisor David Haubert
Whatever the decision at their May 14 meeting, supervisors have said they expect to be sued by one side or the other, or maybe both.
“We’re doing the best we can to follow the process and that is election law, and I will tell you that I think ultimately this feels like it’s going to end up in court one way or the other,” said Supervisor David Haubert.
If Price is successfully recalled, the Board of Supervisors would pick a temporary replacement to serve out the remainder of her term in office. A permanent replacement would be selected by voters in the next election after that term expires.