Grover Beach group wants voters to elect their city attorney. Why?
Grover Beach voters may get a chance to decide whether they should elect their city attorney through a new ballot initiative.
According to a notice of intent to circulate a petition filed to the city in August by petitioners Debbie Peterson, Lesley Marr and Sharon Biddle, petitioners are seeking to change the position of city attorney from a role appointed by the City Council to an elected role selected by voters.
In California, only around 11 of 482 municipalities have elected city attorneys, with most serving larger cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego due to their population size, according to a 2013 League of California Cities guidebook for new city attorneys.
Currently, Grover Beach contracts its legal representation through the firm Lozano Smith, with attorney Robert Lomeli appointed by the City Council in January 2024.
According to the notice of intent, petitioners argue that Lomeli has acted against the interests of the city and its residents, and will seek to replace him by making the position elected.
“The appointed Grover Beach city attorney firm has violated the public interest by impairing access to city records, authorizing closed City Council meetings, been complicit in impairing voters’ right to circulate and file petitions for recall in violation of California’s Constitution and election law, filed appeal of a Superior Court ruling ordering certification of recall without prior City Council approval, has contracts with cities and districts all over California, and charges the City of Grover Beach for part-time civil work more than the state of California pays the attorney general for full-time representation in civil and criminal matters,” the notice of intent states. “The voters find that the office of appointed city attorney shall be immediately terminated for cause, as against the public interest.”
Why is petition in motion?
In the past year, Peterson has been successful in getting initiatives on the ballot; in October, citizen’s group Grover H2O — in which Peterson serves as an organizer — succeeded in gathering enough signatures to get an initiative asking voters if the role of city clerk should be elected rather than appointed, with the issue set to appear on the November 2026 ballot.
Grover H2O was also successful in raising enough signatures to get a recall campaign on the November 2024 ballot against District 2 Councilmember Dan Rushing for his vote to raise water and wastewater rates to pay for Grover Beach’s share of the now-defunct Central Coast Blue water recycling project.
That recall petition process may be the source of the petitioners’ latest initiative. During the recall petition process, city clerk Wendi Sims initially denied Grover H2O’s recall petition, contesting the factual accuracy of several of the group’s stated reasons to start the petition.
The dispute over the recall petition’s content led to Grover H2O’s lawsuit against the city, which was represented by Lomeli.
Attorney Stew Jenkins, speaking on behalf of Grover H2O, said that the efforts to make both the city attorney and city clerk elected are a response to the city’s handling of Grover H2O’s petitions.
“That conflict of interest undermining the democratic process was evident when the appointed city attorney, in concert with the city manager and city clerk, repeatedly interfered with and delayed the lawful certification of three recall petitions which otherwise complied with the law,” Jenkins said in a statement.
In their statement of reasons to launch the petition included in the initial notice of intent, petitioners argued that the city’s current legal representation also represents multiple government municipalities, risking a conflict of interest.
In an email, assistant city manager Kristin Eriksson said while Lozano Smith does contract with several California municipalities, Grover Beach is the only San Luis Obispo County city that contracts with the firm.
The notice of intent also takes issues with Lomeli’s compensation, stating that the city’s legal representation makes more money than the California attorney general.
As of December 2024, state Attorney General Rob Bonta made a salary of $210,460 each year, according to the California Citizens Compensation Commission.
Eriksson said the math is different for Lomeli, as he is paid by the hour rather than being a salaried employee, but the city expects to spend around $200,000 in the 2024-25 financial year for legal services based on a more typical year.
“In calendar year 2024, Lozano Smith billed the city for a total of $325,704,” Eriksson said. “However, this year was anomalous as the city experienced a greater need for legal services related to multiple citizen initiatives and recall measures led by the citizen group Grover H20, as well as the group’s litigation against the city related to the recall petitions.”
What does petition need to be successful?
If successful, the petition would place an initiative measure on the November 2026 ballot for the voters’ approval.
To get there, the petition must collect valid signatures from of 10% of registered voters — or a minimum of 811 valid signatures — by the June 4 deadline, city manager Matt Bronson said in an email.
That measure would only require a simple majority to pass, and would set up the position of city attorney on a four-year term, with a salary capped at no greater than 80% of the California attorney general’s salary, according to the initiative ballot title and summary.
The elected city attorney would represent the city exclusively and cannot be a partner in a firm that represents other municipal agencies, according to the ballot title.
As the current city attorney could face a conflict of interest for providing legal advice to the city as it navigates the petition process, the city has contracted with a firm outside of Lozano Smith for a special counsel, Bronson said in an email.
Should the petition prove successful, the City Council will consult with its special counsel to determine next steps, Bronson said.
If the ballot measure is successful, the City Council must appoint an interim city attorney until the next general election in 2028 that would select the next city attorney, Bronson said.
In an email, Eriksson said the city “finds great value in the services of a full-service law firm for city attorney services, which provides a great deal of legal expertise and resources in various areas of the law pertaining to the city and municipal government in general.”
“Further, the city recognizes the City Council’s interest in being able to select the counsel of their choosing to represent them as a governing body for effective city governance,” Eriksson continued.
This story was originally published April 18, 2025 at 1:57 PM.
