A California city voted to recall its leaders. They’re refusing to leave office

Avenal, a small city in California’s San Joaquin Valley, is in an unusual standoff: voters recalled four of five city council members in April, but three of the recalled officials are still refusing to leave office.

The dispute has become a test of local democracy, election administration and court authority. The recalled officials are still participating in city business while they challenge whether the recall election itself was lawful.

A recall that did not end the fight

The recalled officials include Mayor Alvaro Preciado, Leticia Gamez, David Reynosa and Pablo Hernandez. Reporting on the conflict says at least three of them have continued taking part in council business after the recall was certified.

That has left Avenal in an unsettled position. Voters acted in an April special election, but the officials they voted out have not stepped aside.

The recall campaign grew out of concerns about transparency and the council’s move to end the city’s contract with the county fire department. Avenal has about 13,000 residents and is located south of Fresno in Kings County.

How the standoff escalated

Kings County certified the recall results in May. On June 5, county officials issued a cease-and-desist order saying the recalled officials were unlawfully in office and barred them from using public funds.

The conflict then moved further into open defiance. On June 11, the three recalled council members still in office voted to stay put.

The city also posted about threats and racism on its official Facebook account on June 13, adding to the tension surrounding the dispute.

New reporting on June 18 added a significant legal development: California Attorney General Rob Bonta approved a quo warranto action, allowing recall supporters to file in superior court.

The legal fight

Quo warranto is a legal process used to challenge a person’s right to hold public office. In this case, it is the route recall supporters can use to ask a judge to decide whether the recalled officials must vacate their seats.

The recalled officials argue that the recall was unlawful because Kings County, not the city, conducted the election. Their position is that the election process itself was invalid.

County officials say they have a long history of administering local elections and have no stake in the outcome. That leaves the fight centered on a jurisdictional question as much as a political one: who had the authority to run the election that removed the council members.

Who is involved

The key figures in the dispute are Mayor Alvaro Preciado, council members Leticia Gamez, David Reynosa and Pablo Hernandez, Kings County officials, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, recall organizer Dalila Barajas and Avenal City Manager Antony Lopez.

The remaining un-recalled council member has reportedly supported the recall and urged the recalled members to leave office. That has underscored how isolated the holdouts have become inside city government.

The case has also become a test of trust in election administration and city governance. Supporters of the recall say the issue is whether officials can remain in power after voters have removed them. The recalled members say the process that ousted them was not lawful.

What happens next

Recall organizers can now file the approved quo warranto case in superior court. If they do, a judge could determine whether the recalled officials must leave office immediately.

The next Avenal City Council meeting is scheduled for June 25, and it could become another flash point if the recalled members remain seated and continue to vote.

The dispute also has immediate practical stakes. Who remains in office affects control of city spending, including the June budget process, while the case moves forward.

For now, Avenal remains in limbo: the county has certified the recall, county officials have ordered the recalled members to stand down, the state attorney general has cleared a court challenge and the officials themselves are still governing while they contest the election.