Sacramento judge calls Kings petition errors “fatal flaw,” hints at ruling against public vote

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley has put off until this week a final ruling on the petition campaign to force a public vote on the Kings arena project, but it doesn’t sound like he’s likely to rule in favor of the petitioners:

“These petitions are defective in a multitude of ways,” Frawley told a packed courtroom during a hearing that lasted about 90 minutes. While it could be argued that each individual error wasn’t enough to scrap the petitions, he said, “collectively there are so many errors” that they added up to a “fatal flaw.”

Frawley says he’ll allow the petitioners to submit new arguments on Tuesday, but if you see handwriting on the wall, you’re not alone. At least we may finally get an answer to the question of which side in this dispute is more farcically inept.

Meanwhile, with a respite of a couple of days, the Sacramento Bee’s Marcos Breton has penned a column arguing that voting on things is undemocratic, because journalists can play at this game, too.

9 comments on “Sacramento judge calls Kings petition errors “fatal flaw,” hints at ruling against public vote

  1. Nothing says democracy like advocating against people having a chance to vote on non-essential things they will be compelled to pay for with their tax dollars.

  2. Hey, the rules of filing the petitions are pretty straightforward. If they couldn’t follow them that’s their problem.

  3. Yep, STOP would have had the vote sealed if it wasn’t for that pesky “keeping it legal” thing*.

    * and Chris Hansen’s money, lying petition gatherers, Tomato Man’s money and incompetent leadership.

  4. Unfortunately Sacramento seems to be the equal of Bell, where the city mothers and fathers enriched themselves for years and the citizenry couldn’t get it together to stop them.

  5. There is an interesting report in the Sacramento Business Journal: The proposed arena does not meet the minimum specifications for hosting a major convention.

  6. Lawsuit tossed, as predicted:

    The problem is that the flaws in the petitions really were not minor. That’s the point that STOP doesn’t get. It wouldn’t have been that hard to find a pro bono lawyer who opposed the project, and was competent. All they got was a lawyer who opposed the project.

    This is all on STOP. If they start blaming other people, I’ll let ’em personally know how I feel about that.

  7. From the STOP press release: “It is deplorable that our city’s leaders have put special interests ahead of the voters who elected them. They make a mockery of democracy.”

    You’re up, MikeM.