Struhm

Struhm v. City Council

Good Law
1964 Cal. App. LEXIS 984·229 Cal. App. 2d 278·40 Cal. Rptr. 230
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 18, 1964Civ. 22248California922 words

Opinion

Opinion

Taylor, J.

This is an action in mandamus. Petitions signed by more than the required number of electors of the City of Berkeley were filed by the city clerk on August 3, 1964, calling for a special election to recall three named school directors. One of these resigned, but the other two have not. Opposing candidates have filed nomination papers, and the next general election will not be held until April 6, 1965. The city council contends that the recall provisions of the city charter are inoperable and refuses to call a special election. We have concluded that the council is legally obliged to do so.

We limit ourselves to a discussion of the charter recall provisions and the code sections necessarily involved in the problem before us. The authority of the City of Berkeley to provide for recall by charter is not questioned, and the charter provides that every incumbent of an elective office is subject to recall by the voters of the city. The school directors of Berkeley are elective officers.

Charter section 7, subdivision (4), provides that if the officer to be removed shall not resign within five days after the recall petition requesting a special election is filed by the city clerk, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.