Laguna Niguel, Rancho Santa Margarita, and Ontario are spending taxpayer money to avoid accountability after voluntarily switching to district elections.
In a troubling pattern, these three Southern California cities have dealt with election reform commitments not with integrity, but with aggressive tactics that amount to bullying, racism, and sexism.
All three cities voluntarily transitioned to by-district election systems—a move designed to ensure fairer representation for historically marginalized communities. But when faced with the legal and moral obligation to follow through on their commitments, they’ve taken a darker turn. Rather than engaging in good-faith efforts to comply with their own decisions, they have instead retained two outside law firms, Best, Best & Krieger, LLP (BB&K) and Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni (Nielsen Merksamer) in an attempt to sidestep the consequences of their voluntary transitions.
What began as a process to strengthen local democracy has now devolved into a disturbing display of institutional hostility. In one city, officials reportedly targeted the child of a voting rights expert simply for working with the Dolores Huerta Foundation—a respected organization that advocates for equity in California’s underserved communities. In another, a Hispanic demographer was allegedly followed and subjected to intimidation, raising serious concerns about racial profiling and professional harassment.
The cities’ aggressive legal maneuvers have extended into personal territory. In Rancho Santa Margarita, city-hired lawyers spent thousands in taxpayer dollars on discovery requests aimed at the personal life of the attorney representing the residents. Questions included “What is your married name?” and “List every name you have ever used”—a line of inquiry many see as sexist and irrelevant to the issues at hand.
“This is what happens when cities want to avoid accountability,” said a civil rights advocate familiar with the cases. “They turn to harassment, character attacks, and intimidation rather than simply honoring the promises they made to voters.”
Legal experts warn that these actions not only waste public resources but also send a chilling message to individuals who speak up for fair representation. Targeting individuals based on their ethnicity, gender, or associations not only undermines trust in local government but could potentially violate state and federal civil rights laws.
At a time when many communities are striving to ensure equal voices in local government, the behavior of these Southern California cities sends a disturbing message: rather than engage with constituents honestly and fairly, some officials would rather spend public funds attacking those who challenge them.
The question remains—how far will they go to avoid simply doing what they said they would?
Leave a Reply