Lea este artículo en español aquí.
The San Benito County Board of Supervisors is expected on Nov. 18 to take up a certified recall petition aimed at Supervisor Ignacio Velazquez while he and two other supervisors have made an effort to discredit and possibly challenge the petition in court.
After the San Benito County Elections Department confirmed earlier this month that the group seeking to oust Velazquez had gathered enough valid signatures to trigger a recall election, the current board majority—consisting of Supervisors Kollin Kosmicki, Dom Zanger and Velazquez—have teamed up to fight the effort.
If the recall succeeds, it could upend that majority.
All three supervisors have moved in the past few weeks to discredit the recall, calling it a “sham” or a “scam” and alleging that signature gatherers misled residents into signing the recall petition, possibly in violation of state law.
In a Facebook video, Zanger claimed the effort is being driven by people who lost the 2024 election and want to “stop the progress” the board has made since Velazquez joined it in January.
Kosmicki alleged on Facebook that signature collectors told residents the petition “would increase firefighter pay” and protect their jobs, arguing that these claims were lies.
In a series of mailers, Velazquez has echoed similar points, arguing that paid petition signature gatherers lied, and claiming that the effort is being funded by developers. One mailer appears to paraphrase sections of the California Elections Code which state that it is a misdemeanor for anyone circulating a petition to intentionally misrepresent the petition’s purpose and make false statements to influence someone to sign. The mailer also suggests any organization backing the petition could be held liable as well.
All three supervisors have urged anyone who feels they were misled to contact them.
It’s not yet clear what the supervisors plan to do with that information. Velazquez told BenitoLink they are “exploring options” and “looking at what they can do.” He did not rule out the possibility of taking legal action.
“These people violated the law,” he said. “They paid people from other places to come and lie. They are taking advantage of the system.”
He said that he, Kosmicki and Zanger have received “a few dozen” calls so far from residents saying they were lied to.
Safer San Benito, the group leading the recall effort, rejected those claims. Its co-chair, Stacie McGrady, told BenitoLink they did hire a professional petition circulating company—which is legal in California—to help collect signatures, adding that circulators were given a “script” to follow and that the group never received a complaint.
“We controlled the message,” McGrady said.
According to campaign finance filings published by the county Elections Department, Safer San Benito paid $32,000 to Plain Dan Solutions, a Santa Cruz-based petition circulating company.
In total, Safer San Benito received nearly $33,000 in contributions and loans, mostly from county residents. Aside from Watsonville-based Royal Oaks Market, donors were people, not businesses. Some contributors previously held or sought public office. McGrady ran for supervisor last year and lost to Zanger, and former county planning commissioner Celeste Toledo Bocanegra contributed $1,000. No donor gave more than $6,000.
Regarding the possibility of a lawsuit by Velazquez, McGrady said the group “would defend their position.”
“No one was misled; no one was lied to,” she said. “It’s pretty clear these three supervisors are collaborating, and this is what the recall is about. This is a power grab. There is no independence here. They are all following their leader, Ignacio Velazquez, and we deserve better leadership.”
At this point, after Safer San Benito submitted more than 2,000 signatures and surpassed the threshold of 1,833 validated signatures by just nine, the only remaining way to stop the recall election would be through a court ruling, the county Elections Department confirmed to BenitoLink.
Before the signatures were filed in late September, any signer could request to have their name removed from the petition. But that can no longer be done, according to county elections, which said it has not received any such requests.
After certification of the recall petition, only a judge can stop the process, following an investigation conducted either through the courts or by the district attorney, the Elections Department said. For that to happen, either Velazquez or a resident who believes they were misled would need to take the case to court and start a formal investigation.
Such investigations are not unprecedented. In Salinas, as Monterey County Now reported, the Monterey County District Attorney is digging into whether signature collectors for a rent-freeze petition offered food or other incentives in exchange for signatures.
But at its Nov. 18 meeting, the board’s role will be limited to discussing the recall and setting an election date. Supervisors can choose the date at that meeting or up to 14 days thereafter; if they don’t, the county elections office will be required to schedule the election within five days.
If the recall moves forward, the election would cost between $10,000 and $85,000, depending on the date.
If the board decides to hold a special election, which would occur in the spring, the cost would range between $75,000 and $85,000. If the recall is consolidated with the June primary election, it would cost $10,000.
One of Velazquez’s mailers suggests the recall election could cost more than $100,000.
We need your help. Support local, nonprofit news! BenitoLink is a nonprofit news website that reports on San Benito County. Our team is committed to this community and providing essential, accurate information to our fellow residents. Producing local news is expensive, and community support keeps the news flowing. Please consider supporting BenitoLink, San Benito County’s public service nonprofit news.