As city considers next steps, Holstege calls for DA to recuse himself from legal residence inquiry

A controversial new type of second home. The historic designation of a condominium complex. Approval of $500,000 for a universal basic income program. All of these decisions by the Palm Springs City Council, and possibly more, may be rendered invalid depending on whether allegations are true that one of its elected officials violated municipal code when listing her official residence.

At issue are claims by the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office that Councilmember Christy Holstege, who was first elected to the Palm Springs District 4 seat in November 2017 and re-elected in 2020, does not actually live in her district. If that is proven to be the case, then city rules state she is not legally a member of the council.

Allegations contained in a letter sent from District Attorney Mike Hestrin to the city attorney on Tuesday state that Holstege has not resided at a home in District 4 for years. Instead, Hestrin wrote, an investigation by his office showed she lives in District 3, that she no longer owns her former District 4 home, and that it has been listed on Airbnb since 2022.

Holstege, a Democrat, is not seeking re-election to the council in November. Instead, she is again hoping to win the District 47 seat in the California State Assembly currently occupied by Republican Greg Wallis, whom she narrowly lost to in that race in 2022. Through a statement released by her campaign Thursday, Holstege attributed Hestrin’s actions to political gamesmanship, given the fact he has previously endorsed Wallis.

“Republican Greg Wallis got his Republican DA buddy to change the conversation and distract voters from his record of failing the voters of AD47,” the statement read. “How can the guy who endorses Greg Wallis be the one who is supposedly running an independent investigation? He should recuse himself immediately and refer this matter to the California Attorney General where we have every confidence it will be resolved quickly.”

As for the validity of the claim that she doesn’t live in District 4, the statement read, “Christy does and has always lived in her Palm Springs City Council District at the address where she is also registered to vote.”

The city’s municipal code stipulates that termination of district residency creates a council vacancy unless a substitute residence within the district is immediately declared. If it is proven that Holstege did not have actually reside in the District 4 residence she claimed to live in, that would mean the District 4 seat was technically unoccupied since 2022. Any 3-2 votes by the council where she was in the majority would then become ties.

Hoping to see the evidence that Hestrin claimed to have in his letter Tuesday, City Attorney Jeffrey Ballinger sent his own letter Thursday.

In his letter, Ballinger requested all materials from Hestrin to substantiate his claims, emphasizing the necessity of factual proof to provide accurate legal advice. He also highlighted that the California Attorney General, not the Palm Springs City Council, holds the authority to investigate and determine the legality of holding public office.

Additionally, Ballinger argued that without a thorough investigation or a court ruling, it is premature to assume Holstege’s votes were cast illegally.

“As an attorney yourself, you realize that an attorney’s legal conclusions are only as good as the factual evidence upon which they are based,” Ballinger wrote. “Without factual evidence, I cannot provide specific legal advice or recommendations to my client, the City of Palm Springs, nor to its officials.

Also not the responsibility of the city, a spokesperson said Thursday, is monitoring where City Council members live after they are elected to office.

“When candidates turn in their candidate paperwork for election, they certify under penalty of perjury that they are qualified to hold office, which includes that they live in the appropriate district,” said Communications Director Amy Blaisdell. “No city that we are aware of goes beyond that and actively monitors the residency requirement.”

A search of City Council votes reported by The Post dating back to 2022 shows there have been few 3-2 votes in which Holstege was in the majority, but that that two were among the most contentious the council has considered. They include:

• Final approval of a new ordinance allowing up to 30 co-owned homes in the city late last month. The ownership model, championed by a company called Pacaso, had proven controversial in that some residents feared co-owned homes could disrupt residential areas and drive up property values.
  
  
• Historic designation for the Villa Roma Garden Homes in February 2023, which the council was split on following a recommendation by city staff that the designation not be applied.
  
  
• Approval of $500,000 in matching funds in July 2022 for a universal basic income program Holstege championed. The CEO of the nonprofit that received those funds, Jacob Rostovsky, is currently under investigation for allegedly misappropriating the funds.

Blaisdell said that the exact number of 3-2 votes cast after Holstege allegedly vacated her seat by moving out of District 4 is unknown.

“The City Clerk’s office is reviewing the Council actions during the relevant period, to determine which votes involved a 3-2 vote in which Councilmember Holstege voted in the majority,” wrote Blaisdell.

---