In the wake of incumbent school board Trustee Luis Acle's failure to qualify for the ballot in San Diego Unified (the FlashReport and Red County SD broke the story two Sundays ago and your extremely humble blogger alerted the "mainstream" media to the development), folks were scrambling in the days to follow for an alternative candidate.

Last week, it was confirmed what I already knew.  Charles Wesley Kim Jr. had filed his nominating papers by the extended deadline, but even he guessed he didn't get enough valid signatures submitted.  The resulting U-T story caused some to ask "Keystone Cops?," given the fact that both an incumbent and a new candidate had failed to qualify, thus leaving labor organizer Richard Barrera as the lone, unopposed heir to Acle's seat.

Please bear with me on this one.  

The 200 signature requirement in the City of San Diego is unique, a rather high threshold.  In most other races, even the biggies, it's typically 20, sometimes zero.  High water mark or not, it would seem that with 30 days or so - such as sitting Trustee Acle was provided - one would plan their time accordingly and get it done, maybe even early enough to check the validity of the signatures at the Registrar's office (anyone can do it) before submission, especially if they need to go out and wrangle a few more.  For whatever reason, Acle didn't.

That said, the very reasons for the State law's resulting five day extension to enter the race for non-incumbents - when the incumbent doesn't file or qualify themselves - is to allow appropriate competition, to provide voters more than one choice, and especially to give the proverbial new blood a chance to run when they otherwise would not have considered it against a sitting officeholder.

The five day extension is in calendar days, not government working days.  The deadline for incumbents and challengers is typically a Friday at 5 p.m., exactly 88 days before the election.  If the incumbent doesn't make it, the deadline for other takers is the next Wednesday at 5 p.m. - the five days.

Now, think about this.  If the incumbent doesn't walk into the Registrar's office by the Friday deadline and the print media just happen to pick up the story immediately on Saturday (unlikely), a prospective candidate would still not be able to get their nominating forms until government goes back to work first thing Monday morning at the earliest, less than three days before the extended deadline.

Yet, say the incumbent does walk in by the original Friday deadline, as in Luis Acle's case.  Well, the Registrar may check the signatures and ascertain the incumbent didn't qualify after hours on Friday or over the weekend - if we are lucky.  The San Diego office did.  But without the media - or a humble blogger - having access to inside phone lines and being interested enough to check over the weekend, no one is going to know of the situation until Monday when the Registrar's office posts the information to their website.  At earliest, the mainstream print media has the story Tuesday morning, with the deadline to submit signatures the next day at 5 p.m.  

Uhhh, and that's not counting the time needed for a prospective candidate to check with the spouse and think about things a bit...maybe talk to a priest and a shrink.

Ok, so in about two weekdays - but to dispel the naysayers, let's call it three - the average person has to decide to run, get to the Registrar, collect 200 signatures of qualified voters, and return them?  Is it do-able?  Of course.  Especially if one is rich or unemployed, or can just walk away from their work for a couple of days.  Elective office is supposed to be about the average person representing their fellow citizens, is it not?  Don't even begin to say that the political parties or the unions should have the time to mobilize volunteers to collect signatures for the candidate.

An argument can be made that the uniquely high 200 signature requirement in San Diego city (for school board and city council seats, as I understand it) is fine during the usual 30-day nomination period, but a complete antithesis to competition when the incumbent doesn't qualify.  It goes against the grain of the very reason the five-day extension exists in the first place. 

Yet, what politician is going to have the guts to stand up and propose any kind of change?

In the case of "last man standing " Barrera, the lone candidate as the result of incumbent Acle's flub and Kim's lack of time, good for him.  He went out and collected his 200 signatures during the 30 days, all with the intent of challenging Acle.  Kudos to him for doing his work.  One might ask why he should be penalized for doing what he needed to do.  Yet, again, that misses the very point of the five day extension in the law.  Even he was anticipating taking on a sitting officeholder, not getting a free ride.

So, I ask again.  Anyone have the guts to propose an alternative in the law -- for future races -- that makes sense given the spirit of the five-day rule?  Anyone?  Email me here and I'll let the poli-blogosphere know.