Speak Out

Judge did not rule on merits of lawsuit

I represented former Mayor Stan Kawcsynski in a lawsuit which asked the Superior Court to delete some of the false and misleading statements in election materials about fluoridation Measure S on the November ballot.

Your Sept. 14 article about the lawsuit was pretty good, but the headline "Judge rules Sunnyvale didn't violate election code" was inaccurate. There is no indication that the judge ever reached the merits of the lawsuit

Under Elections Code Section 9295, a judge may not order changes to election materials unless it is shown "upon clear and convincing evidence" that the order "will not substantially interfere with the printing or distribution of official election materials."

Because the County Registrar of Voters had insisted that she needed to send all materials to the printer at the end of the day on Tuesday, Sept. 5, we moved the court hearing up to that morning. The judge, however, took the matter "under submission" and did not issue a decision.

After Sept. 5, it was not legally permissible for the judge to order any changes because the only "evidence" before him was that materials had to have been sent to the printers on Sept. 5. The judge's Sept. 6 order (not received until Sept. 8) denied the petition without explanation.

The bottom line is that Sunnyvale voters will be reading official ballot materials written by proponents of Measure S about the alleged cost of adding pipes and securing "replacement water" that appear to have been entirely concocted. Voters will have to learn the truth some other way.

Gary B. Wesley
Mountain View

Public Safety

Mark Mayfield: Humorist saves the world

Photos: International Festival displays multicultural arts in Sunnyvale

Sports Briefs

High school sports