arrow left
arrow right
  • The Red Brennan Group -v- Jimenez et al Print Writ of Mandate Unlimited  document preview
  • The Red Brennan Group -v- Jimenez et al Print Writ of Mandate Unlimited  document preview
  • The Red Brennan Group -v- Jimenez et al Print Writ of Mandate Unlimited  document preview
  • The Red Brennan Group -v- Jimenez et al Print Writ of Mandate Unlimited  document preview
						
                                

Preview

F LE I SUPERIOR counT 0F CALIFo D CD. Michel—SBN 144258 coumv 0F SAN BERNAanIng'A Joseph Di Monda—SBN 184640 sm 95mm ousraccr Alexander A. Frank — SBN 31 171 8 MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C. NOV 21 2022 180 Ocean Blvd, Suite 200 E. Long Beach, CA 90802 k. Telephone: (562) 216—4444 Facsimile: (562) 216—4445 Email: afrankaffimichcllawycrs.com Attorneys for Petitioner/Plaintiff THE RED BRENNAN GROUP IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO THE RED BRENNAN GROUP. CASE No.2 CIVSBZZISS98 10 Petitioner/Plaintiff, Assignedfbr allpurposes to the Hon. v. DECLARATION OF ALEXANDER A. 12 FRANK 1N SUPPORT OF AMENDED MICHAEL JIMENEZ, in his official capacity PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE AN] U 13 San Bemardino County Registrar 0f Voters; COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND as INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 14 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, [Filed concurrently with Memorandum of Points Respondents/Defendants. and Authorities; notice 0f writ hearing and writ; [proposed order]] 16 Date: December 15, 2022 17 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept: 33 18 Action Filed: Sep. 28, 2022 l9 20 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, 21 Real Party in Interest. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 DECLARATION OF ALEXANDER A. FRANK DECLARATION OF ALEXANDER A. FRANK I, Alexander A. Frank, declare as follows: l. I am an attorney duly licensed t0 practice law before all courts of the State of California. This declaration is submitted in suppofi of Petitioner The Red Brennan Group’s ex parte application for an order to immediately set the hearing date on Petitioner’s writ petition and complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief. The following facts are within my persona] knowledge and if call as a witness I can and will competently testify hereto. 2. In 2020, San Bemardino County voters overwhelmingly approved Measure K. Measure K’s two substantive provisions were limiting the individual supervisors’ salaries t0 $5,000 pcr month inclusive of benefits and a single tenn 0f office limitation. (See true and correct copy of a screenshot from the Registrar’s website 0f the Measure D election results attached as Exhibit A) 3. A true and correct copy of Measure K as it appeared in the 2020 Registrar’s voter information guide, which shows its substantive provisions, is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 4. The Supervisors filed a lawsuit t0 challenge Measure K’s substantive provisions, titled San Bernardino County Board QfSupervisors v. Lynna Monell, San Bemardino County Superior Court Case No. ClVSBZOZS3 19. 5. In July 0f2022, the California court of appeal issued a tentative opinion partially reversing the trial court ruling and essentially upholding Measure K. (A true and correct copy of the California Court 0f Appeal tentative opinion is attached hereto as Exhibit C). 6. Exhibit D is intentionally omitted. 7. The Supervisors formally met 0n July 12, 2022, and their next formal meeting was on July 26, 2022. (A true and correct copy of the July 26, 2022, meeting agenda is attached here as Exhibit E.) 9‘“ and formally adopted Measure D. (A true and 8. The Supervisors met 0n August correct partial copy 0f the August 9 agenda is attached hereto as Exhibit F.) 2 FRANK DECLARATION