CA AG Bonta approves process to remove recalled Avenal councilmembers
The California Attorney General approved Wednesday evening the quo warranto application filed this month by the proponents of the Avenal City Council recall clearing their path to file a suit against recalled city officials.
Voters recalled four council members on April 28. The results were certified by the Kings County’s registrar of voters on May 28. The recall ballot included Councilmembers Leticia Gamez, David Reynosa and Pablo Hernandez and Mayor Alvaro Preciado. Only one member lawfully sits on the City Council.
The Attorney General office said the application met all three of the criteria to grant leave to sue including raising a substantial legal issue, which its solution serves the public interest.
“After evaluating the facts and the law, our office is allowing the applicants to sue the four Avenal City Councilmembers to remove them from office,” the Attorney General’s Office told The Bee in an email Wednesday night.
Recall proponent Dalila Barajas told The Bee Thursday morning she was happy with the application being approved by the Attorney General office.
“I am ecstatic that finally, hopefully, we’re going to get these people out,” Barajas said.
.JPG "FRS_MOB Avenal Recall council meeting 06-11-26 (12).JPG")
She said the city twisted their arms into suing them after they refused to step down following the recall.
“This recall was done legally; this recall got four councilmen out. They are the ones who refuse to honor that,” Barajas said.
“Overall, it’s a big win for the citizens of Avenal,” she said.
A concern is not knowing how long the process is going to take once the quo warranto suit is filed, Barajas said.
The next step is for the applicants to file a lawsuit in superior court, said the AG’s office.
Kings County and recall proponents have to wait for instructions from the Attorney General.
This week Kings County joined the quo warranto application as one of the plaintiffs in coordination with the AG’s office and the consent from the proponents’ counsel.
The county had been evaluating its options after the attorney general declined early this month to step in to handle the recall situation. The county was in the process of preparing its own application when the recall proponents filed an application with the AG office.
“The Attorney General‘s decision clears the way for the courts to determine whether these council members continue to lawfully hold office following the recall election,” County Executive Officer Kyria Martinez told The Bee. “That question will now be resolved through the judicial process.”
What is a quo warranto proceeding?
A quo warranto proceeding is a legal action used to challenge an individual’s right to hold a public or corporate office.
On June 4, the AG’s Office sent a letter to the Kings County DA’s Office and Avenal officials saying it wouldn’t step in and the dispute over the legality of the April 28 recall election “is best resolved by interested local officials or residents through the quo warranto process.”
On the same day, the Kings County District Attorney’s Office notified the city to cease and desist from spending any public funds without legal authorization.
Under California law, the exclusive way to challenge an official’s legal right to hold public office is ordinarily through a quo warranto lawsuit. Before filing a quo warranto suit against a public official, a party must receive approval from the attorney general.
Voters behind the recall of four council members filed an injunction against them and served them and other city officials with civil restraining orders on June 11. That day, Gamez, Hernandez and Preciado voted to decline recognizing the recall election results. Reynosa, who also was recalled, was absent from the meeting.
.JPG "FRS_MOB Avenal Recall Ballots count_05-18-26 (5).JPG")
Avenal city officials had until 2 p.m. Monday to appear and respond as defendants to the quo warranto application, which was reviewed by the Attorney General’s Office on “an expedite basis.”
City Manager Antony Lopez told The Bee the city also believes the quo warranto process is the appropriate forum for recall issues to be resolved.
In their response, the city requested the Attorney General to consider a neutral venue to relocate the lawsuit and to shield two of the four recalled City Council members from the quo warranted application saying those two seats are going to be up for election in November. The Attorney General denied those requests.
“The AGs opinion does not decide the ultimate merits of the City’s legal arguments, nor does it remove any elected official, invalidate any action of the City Council or alter City operations,” Lopez said. “Those questions remain for the courts to decide.
.JPG "FRS_MOB Avenal Recall council meeting 06-11-26 (8).JPG")
Preciado’s and Hernandez’s terms expire in November. Gamez’s and Reynosa’s terms expire in 2028. Ricardo Verdugo, whose term expires in 2028, was the only council member not recalled.
The recall election had more than 73% voter approval. The city has 2,346 registered voters, and voter turnout was 30.43%. City Council members are elected at large for four-year terms.
Avenal voters held a rally Thursday morning to protest the council’s refusal to step down among other things.
This story was originally published June 18, 2026 at 3:52 PM.
