Council Votes to Abolish April Elections

0
387
Suzanne Kingston casts her ballot on Election Day in 2012 at Malibu City Hall. Malibu residents turned out in droves to vote in the presidential and state races. 

Last April’s heated City Council elections could be the last the City of Malibu ever hosts, if Council has its way.

The city leaders voted unanimously in a 5-0 vote Monday night directing city staff to draft a new ordinance, abolishing April elections and running municipal elections concurrently with L.A. County elections in November of even-numbered years.

Running concurrent elections, rather than consolidated elections, means that voters could now have to go out and vote twice every November Election Day, since they will have to cast votes in two separate elections.

“This would entail having two separate elections, two separate groups of poll workers, two separate ballots at each polling station, all in the same election,” City Clerk Lisa Pope told Council.

This is because L.A. County is unable to consolidate ballots, lacking necessary technology.

“Back in November, the county estimated [the date for consolidation] as 2018,” Pope said. “As of the time of the writing of this report, it’s now 2020. So I don’t see that coming any time soon.”

The inconvenience did not deter Council.

“If we want to get people out to vote … we can clearly see by looking at the numbers in the staff report, a significantly higher number of voters come out in the general election,” Councilmember Skylar Peak said during deliberations.

According to reports gathered by city staffers, turnout for November elections, which often feature big ticket ballot items like presidential elections and most recently Measure R, have drawn voters to the polls in numbers that dwarf those of April elections.

“Thirty-three point six six percent of eligible voters cast a vote in the general municipal election on April 8, 2014, but 56.4 [percent] weighed in on Measure R in November of 2014,” said Malibu Community Alliance’s Cynthia Kesselman on behalf of California Common Cause, speaking during the public comment period.

Mayor John Sibert, though he agreed with the motion to move municipal elections, was skeptical of the significance of these numbers.

“The last November election was something of an anomaly,” Sibert said, pointing out that Measure R was an unprecedented election in Malibu history.

“[For the] Measure R issue, $190 was spent per voter, between the two sides,” Sibert said. “That may be the most money spent in an election, ever.”

As for how to get the word out regarding changes in elections, Council discussed a campaign funded by the administration and finance subcommittee to educate voters and encourage them to request absentee ballots.

“You need to apply to be a vote by mail voter … the city could certainly give out an application to every voter … but not an actual ballot,” Hogin explained.

As for the possibility of future consolidated elections, elections expert Kevin Shenkman, who also spoke during public comment, seemed hopeful.

“Consolidation is, or at least will likely be, possible because Malibu does not have a lot of jurisdictions elections going on at the same time as the general, so there will be space on the county ballot,” Shenkman said.

In defending the change to election schedules, Councilmember Laura Rosenthal added that a hurdle for spring municipal elections is spring break in Malibu public schools, during which time many families go out of town.

“Our April elections [are] often during our public school spring break and I have been trying to get a promise from the school district that they will never do that again … and I cannot get them to agree to that,” Rosenthal said.

“If you look at the history of when our elections have been during spring break, the numbers go down — a lot,” she added.

Councilmember Joan House weighed in that larger voter turnout means interest groups could have a harder time winning elections, which is a good thing.

“I’m supporting any way we can at least try to get more voters out, so that other things down the line will have more of a hurdle to jump rather than just being easily put on the ballot,” House said.

The change in elections will result in a change to the term lengths of current sitting councilmembers, though it is not yet clear whether terms will be lengthened or shortened.

“I’m not looking for one additional day on the council, really that’s not my goal, but I think it’s important to do this so we get better turnout,” Sibert said.