View Mobile Site

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

Problems could arise with concurrent elections, official says

Posted: May 4, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: May 4, 2014 2:00 a.m.

In a bid to avoid a lawsuit and increase voter involvement, Santa Clarita has agreed to change its city elections to November starting in 2016. But the change could cause additional wrinkles in the voting process, according to a county elections official.

Santa Clarita City Council members recently approved an ordinance to switch the city’s municipal elections from April to November of even-numbered years.

That means city elections would then fall on the same day as larger elections during which voters cast ballots for state and national elections like those for governor or president.

Santa Clarita City Attorney Joe Montes said the ordinance will be sent on to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for review.

But the council’s vote doesn’t mean the lineup of council contenders will necessarily appear on the same ballot as those running for governor or president.

“The city has the ability to change the election dates to November and, every election, has the opportunity to pass a resolution to request consolidation with the county-administered elections,” Montes said. “The county has the opportunity at that point to either accept or deny the consolidation request.”

Due to constraints of the county ballot, consolidation presents a challenge, according to Efrain Escobedo, governmental and legislative affairs manager for the Los Angeles County Office of Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk.

“Because of just the capacity issues that we face when it comes to the ballot, and these being the heavier-load elections, we have to guarantee ballot capacity for statewide, federal and county races,” Escobedo said.

The city is changing its election dates and also examining a system called cumulative voting as the result of a settlement in a lawsuit alleging violations of the California Voting Rights Act.

The lawsuit claimed the city’s at-large elections, in which all voters can cast ballots for each seat up for election in a given year, violated the Voting Rights Act by preventing Latino voters from electing candidates of their choice.


Escobedo said portions of the county’s current system are based on decades-old technology and, as a result, cannot accommodate ballots that have too many races on them.

“The ballot itself is still pretty much based on that old technology and that is where the limitation is,” he said.

It was these constraints that were cited by county election officials in 2013 as the reason a host of local agencies could not consolidate their elections with the county elections by switching them from November of odd-numbered years to November of even-numbered years.

Supervisors split on the item last summer, the 2-2-1 vote on the matter causing the item to fail.

If consolidation is not possible and the city changes election dates anyway, the city and county elections would be administered separately on the same day.

That could lead to some confusing circumstances for both voters and officials, Escobedo said.

Two elections

First off, voters could expect to see double under such a setup, Escobedo said, receiving two sample ballots or vote-by-mail ballots, for instance.

Even if the county and city were to share a polling location on Election Day, voters could have two sets of poll workers to talk to, two lines to potentially stand in and, eventually, two ballots to cast.

“It’s a real challenge both from the administrative side and from the voter side,” he said.

Escobedo said the concern is not just speculative. Such issues have arisen in the city of Long Beach which, due to its charter, has run-off elections in municipal races if no single candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote during its City Council primary.

Run-offs are held in June, the same day as county primary elections.

According to information posted on Long Beach’s election website, “Voters are required to check in at two separate tables, sign separate rosters and under current conditions would vote using two different voting systems.”

Part of the concern, Escobedo said, is that voters might simply not want to go through the process of voting twice, thus potentially harming voter turnout.

“These aren’t just hypothetical,” Escobedo said. “They’re true anecdotal examples we’ve seen with the city of Long Beach that we’re dealing with.”

Cumulative voting

Complicating matters further is Santa Clarita’s exploration of cumulative voting, a method that would allow residents to cast as many votes as there are seats up for election in a given year, including multiple votes for the same candidate.

Escobedo said such a voting method would likely be incompatible with the county’s current election system.
On Twitter



missyJk: Posted: May 4, 2014 9:56 a.m.

i think it would be easier for people to vote all in ONE day than not sure when we vote i think its safe to say most people who are registered voters know voting time comes in November

Allan_Cameron: Posted: May 5, 2014 4:53 p.m.

The City has a clear path to follow, if it chooses, to move City elections to a date where far larger numbers of voters go to the polls.

The idea that antiquated voter tally machines that are decades old have to remain in place is absurd in LA County. This County is the seventh largest government agency in the United States, with a budget larger than 43 of the 50 states, at over 26 billion dollars.

There are many ways for the City to prevail on this issue. Here is just a partial list:

1. Form an alliance on the issue of moving the election dates to November with the rest of the other 88 cities in Los Angeles County.

2. There are six other local government agencies that hold April elections that have already voted to move their elections to November, but were turned down by the County for the same absurd reason. The City must join forces with them also.

3. In addition to these 6 local districts with April elections, there are, in the rest of LA County, hundreds of other school districts, water districts and the like that also have April elections with tragically low voter participation. Get an alliance with these also to "consolidate" local elections, processed by the County, in November.

4. For those partisans who think there is an "advantage" to low turnout April elections, please consider this: The strictly local Castaic Lake Water Agency elections have been held EXACTLY like this "new" proposed November, even year system for decades. It works fine, as you would surmise.

If the City is serious about greater voter participation, the above suggestions are only a few of the more than 15 reforms that would clearly validate, when all is said and done, that having voters vote for all 5 of the people who govern, not just one of the 5, is, on balance, clearly superior.

How about a response from the City??

You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail The content posted from readers of does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.


Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...