THE HUTCHINSON REPORT: Recall petition is a wake-up call for Harris-Dawson

By Earl Ofari Hutchinson

Contributing Columnist

The announcement that a group of residents of the 8th City Council District have filed a petition to recall Los Angeles City Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson.

It was only a matter of time that Harris-Dawson would be targeted because of the almost non-stop complaints I have heard from many residents about him. They blame him for almost institutionalized illegal street dumping in the district, chronic dirty streets, equally chronic joblessness, rampant business closures, widespread homeless encampments, and his alleged do-nothingness in fulfilling his promise to pour millions into a remake of a vital section of the Crenshaw District dubbed Destination Crenshaw.

The Harris-Dawson antagonists have until February to corral the required number of valid signatures to get a recall measure on the ballot.

Harris-Dawson gave the recall drive short shrift with a defiant statement, “My focus is squarely on serving the residents of 8th District and leading the City Council. With so many pressing issues facing our communities, there is no time for distractions.”

The operative word in his punch back statement was “distractions.” He clearly views the recall effort as little more than a not-so-veiled attempt to hamper his ongoing work in the district. The “distraction” angle will almost certainly be his major point of attack if the recall manages to gain steam.

At first glance, it appears that Harris-Dawson can easily ride out a recall effort. Recalling an elected official is a tough ladder to scale. First, voters must gather signatures from registered voters equal to 15% of the votes cast in the last election for that office. The exact figure in the 8th District is 21,569 valid signatures needed from registered voters in the district.

Next, the council member’s opponents must file a notice of intention and gather the required signatures. Then they must submit the recall petition to the city clerk for verification. Finally, the petition must be verified. Only then can a recall election be held.

That’s just the start. The burden now falls heavily on the recall proponents. They must raise bushels of cash to publicize the recall. They must state their case in plain language why the council member should be recalled. Then they must batten down the hatches and try to weather the storm of support the council member will get from many voters in the district that backed him or her.

That’s not to mention the massive orchestration by the council member of counter advertising and support attacking the recall proponents while back patting his or herself on the all the bountiful things that he did for district residents.

Harris-Dawson will do all of that and more. He will almost certainly have the solid backing of the full City Council that he presides over.

After all, they have a vested interest in ensuring he goes nowhere. If he’s successfully recalled today, it could be them tomorrow. That’s to say some of their disgruntled constituents might get ideas about ousting them too.

But there are two possible pluses the recall proponents have. One is the very fact that things came to the point where they were angered enough at the alleged failings of Harris-Dawson to even file a recall petition. That indicates there is not just concern but real dissatisfaction with his performance in office from at least some of his constituents. That alone should be worrisome for him.

The other plus is the embarrassment that a recall petition stirs. No elected official wants to be the target of a campaign to oust them when they are in office, especially if they have been in the office for any significant period of time.

That’s certainly true with Harris-Dawson. He’s now midway through his third term. In fact, in a couple more years he’ll be termed out. The recall petition is a direct slap in his face and casts a long negative shadow over his years and work in the district.

The real question in any serious effort to oust a well-established elected official is how widespread and deep the discontent is and how effective the elected official can be in beating back the effort to remove him or her. These are X factors in a recall campaign.

And given the high hurdles that must be leaped over to mount a serious recall campaign, it makes a recall a dicey proposition. It’s one of the major reasons recall efforts are extremely rare. In the few cases that get off the ground and go to the ballot, they almost never succeed.

If nothing else, a recall campaign does demonstrate that an elected official’s constituents do have a potentially potent tool to voice their displeasure over the alleged shortcoming of their representation. It also serves as a huge wake up call to the elected official that he or she must pay much closer attention to what their constituents are saying about them.

And more importantly, they must make maximum effort to do what their constituents demand they do on their behalf. Harris-Dawson got that wake-up call.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book is “Undoing the Trump Legacy” (Amazon ebook and Middle Passage Press).