Image from Bryan Pease's Twitter profile
  • Image from Bryan Pease's Twitter profile
  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Bryan Pease, an animal-rights activist and attorney best known for his defense of La Jolla seals, is fighting to be included on the list of potential appointees to fill newly elected mayor Kevin Faulconer's council seat.

Getting his name cleared for appointment has not been simple. In a March 18 press release, he says the city attorney's office is blocking him from filing the necessary paperwork for political and personal reasons.

In response, Pease has filed a federal complaint against the city and city clerk Elizabeth Maland; Pease is seeking a restraining order against the city attorney's alleged directive.

The complaint states that city staff denied Pease's application for not meeting the residency requirements established in San Diego's Municipal Code. Pease claims that he has lived within the district for over a year but only recently got around to changing his address on his voter-registration card.

"The Republican-controlled city attorney's office here instructed city staff on March 17 not to process the application of registered Democrat and attorney Bryan Pease to seek appointment to the interim city council seat currently vacant due to the recent mayoral election," reads a statement from Pease.

Pease and city attorney Jan Goldsmith's office have entered into numerous legal disputes over the years, including the well-publicized fight over a rope barrier at La Jolla’s Children's Pool and the case of Ray Lutz, who was arrested for registering voters in the Civic Center Plaza during the San Diego Occupy movement.

"The City Attorney's office has in the past subjected my clients and me personally to criminal prosecution for protected expressive activity, and now they are seeking to prevent me from being a voice for the citizens of San Diego on the City Council," stated Pease.

A deputy city attorney calls the complaint "absurd."

“The lawsuit is an absurd interpretation of the voter registration requirements in the San Diego Municipal Code. The application was rejected because Mr. Pease did not meet legal requirements about voter registration and residency in the Council district. Mr. Pease contends that he lived in the appropriate district from 2004 to 2007 and that dates between those years should count toward the requirement that he be registered to vote there 'for at least 30 calendar days prior to' filing his papers.

"The Registrar of Voters confirmed that Mr. Pease had not been registered in the District for 30 days prior to attempting to file his papers. Under the interpretation in Mr. Pease’s lawsuit, anyone could seek office if they simply lived in a District at any time in their life.

"Mr. Pease’s decisions about where to live and register to vote are his own. The City Clerk had a ministerial duty to accept only those applications that met legal requirements. This is not a partisan issue, but a straightforward application of the law as it has been historically and consistently applied. While the City Attorney’s Office routinely advises the City Clerk, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith was not involved in this decision."

(corrected 3/20, 11:10 a.m.)

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

More from the web

Comments

shirleyberan March 19, 2014 @ 6:07 p.m.

Did Pease really not change his address on voter registration knowing that Goldsmith and Co. would be trying to find an excuse to trip him up? That would be just silly.

1

Visduh March 20, 2014 @ 7:38 p.m.

This all seems moot since he would not stand any chance whatsoever at being appointed to the seat. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a Goldy fan in the least, and the guy should have the opportunity to offer proof of his residence in the district. We can only wonder why the entrenched group is going to such lengths to stop him from being considered.

1

KLoEditor March 20, 2014 @ 8:56 p.m.

If you know someone is out to get you, don't give them the means to get you. Pease wasn't registered in the district. Which is rather curious. I suppose he can prove he lived where he says he lived, whether a judge will think that's sufficient to overcome the requirement remains to be seen. But yeah, even if he does meet the test, he won't get appointed. Politics in San Diego, always fun and interesting.

1

KLoEditor March 20, 2014 @ 9:02 p.m.

Oh and by the way the thing I find most "absurd" in this article is the Assistant City Attorney saying Goldpelt had nothing to do with the City Attorney's office denying the application. Shades of Chris Christie. Let's just put this absurd little fallacy to rest, once and for all: Staff knows what side their bread is buttered on. Boss man appreciates when his minions keep his skirts clean.

1

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close