Lisel Blash and Stephanie Hellman recall, Fairfax, California (2024)

• Recall efforts
  • Recall efforts by state
  • Recall efforts by office
  • Recall efforts by year
  • Upcoming recall elections
• Local recalls
  • City council recalls
  • Mayoral recalls
  • County commission recalls
  • County official recalls
  • School board recalls
  • Sheriff recalls
  • Special district recalls
• State and federal recalls
  • State executive recalls
  • State legislator recalls
  • U.S. Congress recalls
• Laws governing recall
  • States that have pre-petition signature requirements for recalls
  • States that require grounds for recalls
• Analysis
  • What are recalls?
  • Recall terms
  • Analysis (2010-present)
  • 2025 mid-year analysis
  • 2024 year-end analysis
  • 2024 mid-year analysis
  • 2023 year-end analysis
  • 2023 mid-year analysis
  • 2022 year-end analysis
  • 2022 mid-year analysis
  • 2021 year-end analysis
  • 2021 mid-year analysis
  • 2020 year-end analysis
  • 2020 mid-year analysis
  • 2019 year-end analysis
  • 2019 mid-year analysis
  • 2018 year-end analysis
  • 2018 mid-year analysis
  • 2017 year-end analysis
  • 2017 mid-year analysis
  • 2016 year-end analysis
  • 2016 mid-year analysis

Lisel Blash and Stephanie Hellman recall
Officeholders
Lisel Blash Stephanie Hellman
Recall status
Did not go to a vote
Signature requirement
1,500 signatures
See also
Recall overview Political recall efforts, 2024 Recalls in California California recall laws City council recalls Recall reports

An effort to recall Town Councilmembers Lisel Blash and Stephanie Hellman did not go to a vote in Fairfax, California. Notices of intent were rejected for a second time on May 3, 2024.

Recall supporters

An organization called the Committee to Rescue Fairfax organized the recall. The committee's website read:

“

Our town is at risk but many are not aware of how serious it is. Some members on Fairfax Town Council have put their own political agenda above the interest of the people who elected them. It is time for all of us to speak out. Voted to allow ridge-top development on unstable land, disregarding long-standing Fairfax policy. Failed to address the homeless camp crisis in Peri Park, endangering our community with pollution, fire hazards and open hard drug use. Failed to enact repair of town infrastructure and facilities from tax money earmarked for maintenance. Voted to spend tax revenue on outside consultants to draft inappropriate plans for state-mandated Housing Element. Voted to spend tax revenue to implement ill-advised rent control and eviction ordinances resulting in negative consequences to homeowners, housing providers and renters. Voted to spend tax revenue to create a rent mediation process before the contested ordinances are resolved by voters in November. Failed to save tax revenue by using free mediation services provided by the County. HOSTILITY TOWARD CONSTITUENTS: Allowed policy influence from outside groups such as the Democratic Socialists of America. Failed to speak with any homeowners on critical decisions that affect their property value and infringed upon property rights. Voted to abridge citizens’ first amendment rights to free speech at public meetings. Supports removal of the Marin Alliance Cannabis Dispensary from Fairfax, a historic, beloved and critical service, which generates much-needed tax revenue for the Town.

”

Charles Dines, the treasurer for the Committee to Rescue Fairfax, said, "Democracy is supposed to be representative. These people are not representative of us."

Recall opponents

In an email statement to Marin Independent Journal, Blash said, "In my short time on this Council, I have worked hard to address these issues, enhance communications and transparency, engage constituents, and make room for a broader range of voices in local decision making" and "It is disappointing to see this petition, where some of the complaints are about decisions made before I was elected, and many are untrue or misleading at best."

Hellman said, "We have seen recalls are ineffective and a waste of resources" and "Voters already made their democratic choice based on what I ran on. I’m taking it seriously though and look forward to talking to voters" in an email statement to Marin Independent Journal.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing recall in California

No specific grounds are required for recall in California. The recall process starts with a notice of intention to recall. The notice must be served to the officer whose recall is being sought as well as published in a newspaper of general circulation. The notice must then be filed with the relevant election office. Once the notice has been deemed sufficient by the election office, a petition must also be filed and approved by the election office. Once the petition is approved, it can be circulated. To get a recall on the ballot, supporters must collect signatures from registered voters in the jurisdiction. The number of signatures required is between 10% and 30% of registered voters in the jurisdiction, depending on the size of the jurisdiction. Jurisdictions with 1,000 registered voters or fewer require 30%, and jurisdictions with 100,000 or more registered voters require 10%. Charter cities can also set their own signature threshold. The amount of time allowed for the circulation of recall petitions also varies by the number of registered voters in a jurisdiction, between 40 and 160 days. Jurisdictions with fewer than 1,000 registered voters allow 40 days, and jurisdictions with more than 50,000 registered voters allow 160 days.

If a recall petition were deemed sufficient, recall organizers would need to collect roughly 1,500 signatures within 90 days.

See also

• Ballotpedia's Recall Report
• Fairfax, California
• Recall campaigns in California
• Political recall efforts, 2024
• City council recalls

External links

• Search Google News for this topic
• Fairfax, California

Footnotes

Political recall elections

Recalls
by year

Upcoming recalls • 2025 • 2024 • 2023 • 2022 • 2021 • 2020 • 2019 • 2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 • 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • Historical recalls • Recall statistics and analysis

Recalls
by office

Governors • State legislators • County officials • County commission • Sheriffs • Mayors • City officials • City council • School board • Special district

Recalls
by state

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • District of Columbia • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

Recall
laws

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • District of Columbia • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Kansas • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Rhode Island • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming • States that require grounds for recalls • States that have pre-petition signature requirements for recalls