The League of California Cities officially took no position on whether the voters should have the right to referendum even if it allows lawfully enacted, but now inconsistent zoning remain in place. Nevertheless, their brief urged the Supreme Court to find that there is an implied waiver of the People’s Constitutional rights if they did not object to the general plan amendment. The Law Office of Asit Panwala and the Law Office of J. Randall Toch filed an answer brief highlighting that there is no precedent for finding a Constitutional right has been waived without knowledge, consent or warning.
At issue is the very notion of democracy; when voters sign petition for a referendum, they should expect that they will be able to exercise their right to approve or reject the legislation adopted by their city council. In this case, the City Council’s decision to rezone land would not only give an out-of-town developer a huge windfall, but also allow another hotel to be built. More than 2,500 registered voters signed the petition, and yet the City to allow them to cast their ballots. The Law Office of Asit Panwala and the Law Office J. Randall Toch sued the City on behalf of the Hotel Coalition. The Sixth District agreed with them in City of Morgan Hill v. Bushey (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 34. The brief filed today in response to the League’s amicus brief is attached.