A California Court of Appeal recently considered the issue of whether a water district was required to place on the November election ballot an office for a member of the governing board that had been vacated and then filled by appointment. The Court held that the office had to be placed on the ballot, pursuant to Government Code section 1780(a), because the vacancy occurred in the first half of the four-year term. (Robson v. Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District (2006 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,996, Cal.App. 2 Dist., Sept. 1, 2006))
Facts
Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District (“Water District”) is an incorporated water district with a governing board of five directors that serve four-year terms. In 2004, Kenneth Manning was elected the director of Division 3, but he resigned his seat less than four months after taking office. The remaining directors appointed Leo Garcia to fill the vacancy. On June 6, 2006, the Water District voted not to place the Division 3 office on the November 2006 ballot. Thelma Robson, a resident of the Water District, filed a lawsuit to challenge the decision not to place the Division 3 office on the ballot. The trial court determined that pursuant to Government Code section 1780(a) the office had to be placed on the ballot. The Water District appealed the trial court’s decision to the Court of Appeal.
Decision
Section 1780(a) sets out the requirements for filling a vacancy in an elective office on the governing board of a special district, such as the municipal water district in this case. Of particular importance, section 1780(a) provides that a person appointed to fill a vacancy “shall hold office until the next general election that is scheduled 130 or more days after the date the district board is notified of the vacancy, and thereafter until the person elected at that election to fill the vacancy has been qualified.” Similarly, section 1780(d) provides that “‘[t]he person appointed to fill a vacancy shall hold office until the next general election . . . , but persons elected at that election to fill a vacancy shall hold office for the unexpired balance of the term of office.” Interpreting these two sentences together, the Court of Appeal held that, if a vacancy occurs in the first two years of the four-year term, the person appointed to fill the vacancy may hold office only until the person elected at the next general election has been qualified and the elected person will serve the remaining two years of the term. Here, the vacancy occurred well within the first half of the four-year term; therefore, the trial court correctly determined that the Division 3 office has to be placed on the November 2006 ballot.
The Water District focused on the sentence in section 1780(a) that says, “If the term of office is due to expire following the next general district election . . . , the person appointed to the vacancy shall fill the balance of the unexpired term of his or her predecessor.” Acknowledging that this sentence is confusing when read alone, the Court read all of section 1780(a) and (d) together and concluded that this sentence applies if a vacancy occurs in the second half of the four-year term. Under such a circumstance, the person appointed will complete whatever remains of the term.
Legal Alert Disclaimer
Legal Alerts are published by Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard as a timely reporting service to alert clients and other friends of recent changes in case law, opinions or codes. This alert does not represent the legal opinion of the firm or any member of the firm on the issues described, and the information contained in this publication should not be construed as legal advice. Should further analysis or explanation of the subject matter be required, please contact the attorney with whom you normally consult.