The District might be headed toward a situation similar to last year’s California Recall. That is, if participants in Save Our City, an organization devoted to removing Washington, D.C., ayor Anthony Williams from office, succeed in their efforts to have a recall initiative placed on this fall’s Election Day ballot.

Save Our City is both non-profit and non-partisan. Volunteers from the organization are currently combing the city in search of the 37,000 signatures needed for the recall petition.

Those who have pushed for the recall cite Williams’ inability to reform the police force, create low-income housing or produce a meaningful healthcare system for low-income citizens of the District.

Campaign Georgetown, a group devoted to giving students a voice in local government, has worked with Williams in the past to improve communication between students and the community.

Although saddened by some actions of the Williams administration, co-chair of Campaign Georgetown Eric Lashner (COL ’05) says he does not believe the mayor’s job performance has warranted a recall.

“Essentially, I believe a recall should only occur in extreme circumstances,” he said. “There have been scandals and failed campaign promises. They, however, are not reasons for someone to be recalled.”

Williams has drawn fire for his efforts to wrest control of the city’s public school system from the city school board. The D.C. City Council is expected to vote on the measure next week and it appears that a majority of Council members oppose the plan.

Williams has also been embroiled in a number of scandals involving the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics, the D.C. Office of Property Management and the Washington Teachers Union.

The effort to oust Williams from office won a major victory last month when the political action committee of the Washington Teachers Union voted unanimously to support the recall effort.

Lashner believes that the scandals, while “horrible,” are nothing compared to the corruption of past administrations.

“The city government is bloated and unwieldy,” he said. “The Williams administration has worked pretty hard at conquering the beast that is the D.C. city government.”

Peter Edelman, professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, also says he had “high hopes” for Williams which were not fulfilled. Like Lashner, however, Edelman does not support the recall.

“I do not want to see an outcome of the recall that moves the city backwards rather than forwards,” he said.

Edelman is disappointed in Williams’ performance but likens the situation to the recall of California Governor Gray Davis in the fall of 2003. Though he was not satisfied with Davis’ actions in office, Edelman was “totally opposed” to the recall there.

“I think [Williams] has been particularly unresponsive to the needs of lower income people in our city,” he said. “[But] a recall is an exceptional step. I don’t see it as being justified in our city at the present time.”

Both Edelman and Lashner believe that voters should voice their concerns with the current administration by voting against him in the next scheduled mayoral election.

“We, the voters of Washington, D.C., elected him twice already and if he wants to run again, then it would be appropriate to vote against him if we chose so,” Lashner said.

Williams was elected into office in 1998 and 2002. He is considering running again and has already formed an exploratory committee to begin raising funds for a reelection campaign in 2006.

If Save Our City is successful in acquiring the necessary signatures for its recall petition by July 28, the proposal will be placed on the Nov. 2 ballot for voter approval or disapproval.

If the recall is approved, an election would be scheduled in February or March of next year to choose a new mayor.