Wade

Alliance for a Better Downtown Millbrae v. Wade

Good Law
108 Cal. App. 4th 123·133 Cal. Rptr. 2d 249·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 617·2003 Daily Journal DAR 4511·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3560
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 25, 2003A099453California4,336 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gemello, J.

Does a city elections official have authority to refuse to certify an initiative petition based on extrinsic evidence relating to the manner of its circulation? We conclude that she does not, and that an elections official’s role in certifying an initiative petition is confined to the ministerial task of examining the four comers of the petition for compliance with submission requirements. Here, a city clerk refused to certify an initiative petition after deciding based on extrinsic evidence that it was circulated in violation of state law. This fact finding exceeded the scope of the clerk’s lawful ministerial duties, and the trial court properly issued a writ of mandate directing the clerk to certify the initiative petition. Therefore, we affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

In June 2001, respondent Alliance for a Better Downtown Millbrae (Alliance) circulated a petition seeking to have the “Downtown Zoning Initiative” (DZI) placed on the Millbrae ballot. If passed, the DZI would have amended Millbrae’s zoning ordinance to restrict the density of restaurants, adult businesses, and certain other establishments in a specific section of downtown Millbrae. After…

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.