History has proven that recall elections are one of the worst facets of our representative democracy. They are almost always misdirected, often full of vengeful emotions, very costly, and, almost always ineffective. It may be a very good thing that most recall election attempts never make it to a ballot. California has had 179 attempted recall elections in the last 100 years. Only 11 have qualified for a ballot and, of those, only six have been successful, the last one notably in 2003 when Gray Davis was recalled from his governor’s post.
Running a government by the whims of emotional recall elections would be like putting children in charge of their own diets or the fans of a sports team calling all the plays.Â
Representative democracies, like our United States of America, and state and local governments, all run on scheduled open elections every two, four or six years. Elected officials get fact-checked and performance-reviewed by their constituents over these short intervals of time. Except for the most extreme cases of moral, fiscal or authoritarian abuse, recall elections are not needed.
Sonoma County voters now face two separate recall elections on their Sept. 14 ballot — and the potential for another recall vote in early 2022. There is a statewide election to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom and there is a special election in Sonoma County to recall District Attorney Jill Ravitch. A west county parents petition looks to recall two high school district trustees in time for an early 2022 ballot. In all three elections, the targeted officials would be facing a regular election in just two years or sooner.
These three recall elections share similarities and differences. All three appear to be based on misguided or misinformed motives by the original recall petitioners. None seem to offer any clear or constructive remedies. The governor’s recall is strictly a partisan tantrum against a Democratic governor. The county’s district attorney recall is the worst. It is one man’s attempt to seek revenge against Ravitch because she held him accountable under the law when he abandoned elderly residents of his assisted living development in the middle of the Tubbs Fire in 2017 and was fined $500,000. The west county Analy-El Molino school trustee recall is the most tragic and may result in the largest regrets of unintended consequences.
The one recall election we might have endorsed — the ejection of Dominic Foppoli from his Town of Windsor mayor’s seat — isn’t happening because he resigned against a tidal wave of sexual misconduct allegations.
West county parents want to remove trustees Kellie Noe and Jeanne Fernandes for voting to consolidate the two west county high schools on to the Analy campus. These parents also would like to see the dismissal of superintendent Toni Beale. A successful recall election will not solve the $2 million deficit or the declining student enrollment that forced the trustees to vote for consolidation. It is always true that these school leaders could have improved outreach and communications over the past few years and widened the search for alternatives to any campus closures. But it was the west county voters who rejected two special tax initiatives last year to keep the school doors open, even if on a short-term basis. How will a recall improve the district’s finances or promote increased student enrollment?
William Gallagher has single-handedly funded the $1.6 million recall vendetta against Ravitch. No single person should have that sway in any election that impacts the justice system of 488,000 county residents. Gallagher’s detestable twisting of facts and his grotesque accusations against Ravitch — even evoking a family tragedy totally unrelated to Ravitch’s duties or tenure — leaves him on questionable ethical and moral grounds. It would not be the first recall election to backfire in someone’s face.
