City May Pay Zeanah’s Legal Bills in Recall Case

THOUSAND OAKS — This city could soon be forced to pay the legal bills--which could total more than $20,000--that Councilwoman Elois Zeanah incurred when her lawyers successfully sued City Clerk Nancy Dillon earlier this year in a recall-related dispute.

Attorney Raleigh H. Levine of Strumwasser & Woocher convinced Ventura County Superior Court Judge Joe Hadden in February to freeze more than 15,000 signatures to recall Zeanah on grounds that the petition format violated state election law. The committee working to oust the embattled councilwoman, Yes! Remove Elois Zeanah, opted to start over, beginning a second signature drive using an amended petition format approved by Hadden.

However, the case remains in limbo because it was never dismissed and no judgment was ever entered.

Levine said Wednesday that she will soon file a motion with Hadden demanding that Thousand Oaks pick up the tab for the legal fight. Levine said the firm had not tabulated the total, but she estimated that the bill could top $20,000.

By contrast, Yes! Remove Elois Zeanah, which was only a third party in the signature suit, reported legal bills of $15,518 in its quarterly financial disclosure statement last month.

“We have made no secret of the fact that we intend to seek legal fees in this case,” Levine said. “We fully intend to do that.

“If you have to take the city to court to uphold the law, you should be reimbursed. Otherwise, people who go to court to get government to uphold laws would be burdened.”

Not surprisingly, City Atty. Mark Sellers sees the situation differently.

Although he concedes that Hadden may eventually force the city to pay Zeanah’s legal fees, Sellers said it is highly questionable whether the suit helped taxpayers at large, which he sees as a critical factor.

“I don’t see any great benefit to the public from this action,” Sellers said. “The suit was self-serving. Normally, fee awards [against government agencies] are associated with actions that serve the public.”

The suit was filed not by Zeanah, but by Thomas Humphreys, a Thousand Oaks resident, on Zeanah’s behalf. Zeanah argued Wednesday that although she has hired Santa Monica-based Strumwasser & Woocher for recall-related legal counsel, she is not responsible for the lawsuit’s legal bills.

“A citizen filed that suit, it was not mine, but it is sad when citizens have to force the city to uphold the law,” Zeanah said. “The lawyer [Levine] told the city and the recall group that the petition was illegal beforehand, but they did nothing. Any cost was based on the refusal of the city attorney and the recall group, who failed to follow the law.”

Peter J. Turpel, spokesman for Yes! Remove Elois Zeanah, argued that Thousand Oaks residents should not have to bankroll a lawsuit against their own city government--particularly when it involves a recall.

“Here Mrs. Zeanah is trying to charge the taxpayers for her legal fees,” Turpel said. “She is defending herself from the recall with taxpayer funds.”

The issue, Levine said, is that Humphreys had no recourse but to take Dillon and Thousand Oaks to court to uphold election laws that the city should be upholding anyway, so the city should pay his costs.

“The taxpayers are already paying the city’s lawyers’ fees in this case, and those were completely unnecessary,” Levine said. “The city created this situation.”

The attorney for Yes! Remove Elois Zeanah, Mitchel B. Kahn, has tried to have the case dismissed without prejudice.

“The point is, is there anything left to try? No,” Kahn said.

Levine has tried to get Kahn and Sellers to stipulate to a judgment. They have refused, she argues, because of concerns that doing so would increase the likelihood that Thousand Oaks would pay her legal fees.

“I’m not sure there is any face to save,” Levine said. “They lost. But they apparently think a piece of paper saying they lost will make them more liable than they already are.”

In another recall-related matter, the City Council late Tuesday approved a second reading of an ordinance that will require recall groups to disclose any contribution of $250 or more within 24 hours. Councilwoman Linda Parks had proposed the ordinance, arguing that residents needed to know where the recall money was coming from right as the mailers and propaganda hit their homes.

Mayor Judy Lazar and Councilman Andy Fox are also facing recall, albeit at the hands of a different group, Residents to Recall Fox and Lazar. The groups need signatures from 15% of the city’s registered voters, or about 10,169 signatures in all, to place their recall measures on the ballot.