This California town booted out its leaders – what happens if they refuse to leave?

Avenal has been rocked by the council’s refusal to accept the results of a recall election – and the repercussions extend far beyond the Central valley

F rom the outside, the city of Avenal appears to embody every bit of its motto – an “oasis in the sun”. Approaching the community, passing through the dusty yellow hillsides of the Central valley, Avenal emerges with a sudden burst of green on the horizon.

Its small-town feel and quiet tree-lined streets offer respite from the bustling Interstate 5 about five miles away. But trouble is brewing here that has brought this lonesome city national attention.

In April, voters in the city of 13,500 people recalled four of five city council members, in what recall organizers said was a first in California . And, in another first, the city council members have simply remained in office.

For months, they have refused to accept the results, alleging that the recalls were improperly conducted, and have carried on holding meetings, overseeing city business and suing in an effort to invalidate the election.

The dispute, and the disagreements that led to the recall, have left this community deeply divided, residents told the Guardian, and eager for a resolution that will bring back some kind of normalcy.

But the repercussions of what is unfolding in this small city extend far beyond the Central Valley.

“If every successful recall is challenged by the people who are recalled, on whatever basis, it undermines the whole purpose of the recall process itself,” said Zev Yaroslavsky, the director of the Los Angeles initiative at the UCLA Luskin school of public affairs. “When does it end?”

Avenal was once an oil town but today the nearby prison is a major employer, as is the agriculture industry – the majority Latino city describes itself as the pistachio capital of the world.

The community has always been tight-knit, said Delila Barajas, a recall organizer who is now running for city council. People here were humble and family-oriented and eager to help one another out, she said.

Nearly everyone offers a slightly different answer about when exactly things got off track, but most point to the city’s move to create its own fire department last year. Avenal had long received fire services from Kings county, but announced last year it would instead establish a volunteer city fire department as the cost of county services was slated to significantly increase.

The decision hit a nerve. People in the community have deep ties to the county fire department, said Ginger Wallis, another organizer of the recall who is now running for council. But it also put into relief larger frustrations with the mayor and the city council.

The county district attorney would eventually sue Avenal , alleging the council committed multiple Brown Act violations by allegedly discussing plans about proposed city fire services during closed-session meetings where the public is not permitted.

It was part of a broader trend, Barajas said. “I saw a lot of disrespect to our community,” she said. As residents spoke at meetings city council members filed their nails, used their phones and spoke to one another, she alleged. “It was the lack of attention.”

In California, voters can seek to remove elected officials from office via a recall if they can collect enough signatures from voters supporting a recall vote. The city sued to stop the process, but it moved ahead. Voters ultimately overwhelmingly backed the recall of four council members: mayor Alvaro Preciado, and city council members Leticia Gamez, David Reynosa and Pablo Hernandez.

The recalled officials and city manager cast doubt on the recall from the beginning, Barajas said, arguing organizers had misled people when seeking signatures, and that the election was unlawfully administered by the county.

The city has taken legal action to dispute the results and sued the recall organizers and the county, Barajas and Wallis said. The conflict has only intensified, with recent local meetings rocked byinfighting and the city accusing recall supporters of using racist language.

The Kings county district attorney has begun investigating the matter. The California attorney general has approved a quo warranto lawsuit, which is used to resolve disputes about an elected official’s legal right to hold office.

Amid the recall conflict, strife between the city and the county over fire services continued. The county stopped serving Avenal in June and the city began operating its fire department with eight full-time workers.

None of the four recalled city council members nor the city manager responded to inquiries from the Guardian. Preciado said in a recent interview that they were entitled to “due process” and that by stepping down, they would effectively be leaving the city in the lurch without a full council.

Barajas is frustrated by that explanation, describing it as a “loophole”.

“He swore an oath to uphold the constitution of the United States of America. Part of that oath is exactly what we’re going through right now. Which is, give us our democratic process,” she said, adding that she wasn’t shocked they have remained office.

“I’m not. Because that’s exactly what we’ve been dealing with. We’ve come to expect it,” she said.

During a June session of the city council, tensions erupted with angry residents urging the officials to leave office. An unsigned communique on the city’s Facebook page condemned what it described as violent threats and racist remarks from recall supporters.

The city manager, Antony López, wrote on Facebook that the recall effort was not based on transparency concerns: “When racist slurs, threats, and harassment are tolerated, it becomes clear this recall was built on hate, not accountability.”

Recall supporters have said the allegations are an effort to distract from the issue at hand – recalled council members who will not leave office.

Yaroslavsky, who served in elected office in Los Angeles for 40 years, said he had never heard of recalled officials remaining in office and that the idea that a court would overturn the results of an election was “unprecedented”.

He said the council members were “gumming up the works by filing lawsuits and not adhering to the law”.

“We are a democracy of laws, not of whim. I don’t understand how people who were recalled in April can still be serving in August. They are making decisions on a constituency that they are not legally entitled to make.”

Outside the Avenal Theater last week, about 20 residents gathered ahead of a scheduled city council meeting, the first official gathering since June, before it was canceled.

Rae Packwood, a lifelong Avenal resident, had planned to attend, eager to hear how the council members justified remaining in their seats.

She wants to ensure that the recall was conducted properly, but also believes they need to step down. Avenal was always a quiet neighbor-oriented town, Packwood said, where the city effectively managed its budget. That is no longer the case, she argued.

But given how the last meeting went, Packwood wasn’t surprised this one was called off.

“I might have cancelled myself,” she said with a laugh. “Everyone here is totally against them.”