[Noozhawk’s note: First in a series about Santa Barbara’s transition to district-based elections for the City Council.]
For years, Santa Barbara’s Mesa, Riviera and San Roque neighborhoods were the political power bases deciding who would serve on the City Council.
They produced the most candidates and winners, and often had higher voter turnout than other areas of the city.
Santa Barbara moved between district and at-large elections throughout its history, and had conducted at-large races since 1968.
With few exceptions, the at-large voting system elected a steady stream of older, retired, white men and women to make decisions about Santa Barbara’s way of life.
In that system, the demographics of residents and elected officials did not match.
It started to change in 2014.
Activists enlisted the help of a high-powered attorney to file a lawsuit alleging that the City of Santa Barbara’s at-large election system violated the California Voting Rights Act.
The plaintiffs included several people from underrepresented neighborhoods who had run unsuccessful council campaigns.
They pointed out that four in 10 city residents identified as Latino and/or Hispanic, but only one person on the seven-member City Council did: then-Councilwoman Cathy Murillo, who was elected mayor in 2017.
That lawsuit, and many others like it, alleged that the at-large voting system diluted Latino votes, and impaired residents’ ability to elect candidates of their choice.
Some candidates have demonstrated strong showings in their own neighborhoods, but not enough to win a citywide seat. In 2013, precincts in the Eastside, Westside and downtown neighborhoods voted for Megan Diaz Alley and David Landecker over Frank Hotchkiss (who won a seat).
Cities have not been able to disprove these allegations, generally, and Santa Barbara agreed to switch to district elections to avoid a costly legal battle.
There are seven people on the Santa Barbara council, including the mayor, who is still elected by the entire city.
For the six other council seats, each person is elected by a specific district of the city. Two of the six districts were specifically drawn to include a majority population of Latino citizens of voting age — District 1, the Eastside neighborhood, and District 3, the Westside neighborhood.
Murillo was elected to the City Council in a 2011 at-large election. When she was re-elected in 2015, it was for the District 3 seat. She is the first Latina elected to the City Council.
When she reflects on the changes of the past five years, Murillo says district elections have brought more neighborhood representation to city government.
“Residents have a representative from their area of the city, a representative who can focus on issues related to that area, like traffic circulation and neighborhood watch, and be connected to schools and businesses in that district,” she told Noozhawk.
Murillo said she can drive down a street and know which families live there, know their concerns, and even know their pets.
“I see people at Foodland and El Zarape, and it’s a great feeling, being where residents and business owners can find me,” she said.
“I know the Westside is unique and smaller than other districts, but I can say with confidence that each council member lives and shops in their districts where they are accessible and run into constituents and business owners.”
Councilwoman Meagan Harmon had a similar observation.
“District elections have had a number of very positive impacts for our community, namely that many people who previously felt themselves to be left out of the political process now have direct, and directly accountable, representation at City Hall,” she said.
“I believe this system significantly improves constituent services — our neighbors now have a specific representative whom they know and can go to with their concerns. Finally, there is a higher level of accountability; our neighbors expect their interests to be reflected by their representative and they now have the capacity to hold their council member directly accountable.”
It has not been a perfect system, however.
“When I ran the first time in 2011, it was at-large, and we had no less than 17 candidates forums,” Murillo recalled. “I met people living in all parts of the city through neighborhood associations, like Samarkand and the Riviera.”
She also walked throughout the city to talk to voters and get to know communities.
“Now, with a district-based election system, there are fewer forums that take a candidate outside of their home district,” Murillo said.
“Election season is the time to hear from residents about their worries and concerns, about what they want from their City Council, and it’s a time for a candidate to be clear about their values and how they will vote on issues.”
She said the district system may have shrunk those connections.
“A candidate is missing out on that information, at a time when she is formulating policy concepts and opinions,” Murillo said.
Outcomes of the New System
In Santa Barbara, district elections have caused dramatic changes in terms of diversifying representation — at least in terms of ethnicity, age and gender.
Four Mexican-Americans have been elected to the council since district elections were created in 2015, and three of them sit on the dais today: Murillo and Council members Alejandra Gutierrez and Oscar Gutierrez.
Alejandra Gutierrez and Oscar Gutierrez, who are not related, both grew up in the neighborhoods they now represent, the Eastside and Westside, respectively.
In the last three at-large elections, voters chose eight men and two women for council seats.
In the first three district-based elections, city voters chose six men and four women for seats.
With districts, each neighborhood gets to directly elect a representative to the City Council.
“For decades, City Council representation was determined by at-large voters,” said Frank Banales, a plaintiff in the district elections lawsuit. “Small, but active, numbers of the community would determine who the candidates would be that they would support for election of City Council representatives.”
He said those power bases didn’t want to lose control and opposed district elections.
“Very few Latinos were chosen as winning candidates during that period,” Banales said. “Today, the mayor and two City Council members are Latinos, thanks to district elections.”
More important than electing Latinos to the City Council, he added, is giving power to neighborhoods, particularly on the Eastside and Westside.
“Neighborhoods can elect their representatives regardless of ethnicity,” Banales said.
Having one member — out of seven — does not automatically give a historically underrepresented neighborhood the attention it needs, he noted.
Appointing members of government boards and commissions by district would promote more neighborhood-level input into city decision-making, he added.
Local district elections have also created a sort of tension representing a specific area and the city overall.
“As a district representative, it is our duty that we take our constituents’ needs and concerns all the way to City Hall, while still keeping the citywide issues in mind,” Alejandra Gutierrez said.
“Because I represent a district with a large population of Latinos, and myself being a Latina, another negative aspect is that many people feel that I only advocate for that population.”
There have been fewer candidates per seat in 2017 and 2019 compared to previous at-large elections, but a more diverse pool of ethnicity, age and gender.
Limiting the candidate pool was a concern with district elections, since candidates can only run for the district where they live.
Santa Barbara had uncontested races last year, for the first time ever.
Oscar Gutierrez and Harmon were appointed in lieu of an election when no one challenged them for their seats. Gutierrez was originally elected in a special election to fill a vacancy, and Harmon was originally appointed to fill a vacancy.
Candidates are also elected with far fewer votes than they were in the at-large system. The three most-recently elected candidates each received fewer than 1,000 votes.
The top three vote-getters in the 2013 election each topped 6,500 votes.
Santa Barbara was the first local city to move to district elections, and lessons from its implementation could help guide others.
Read The Series
» 5 Years Later, Santa Barbarans Reflect on Goals, Outcomes of Switch to District Elections
» District Election Advocates Say There’s Still Work to Do to Improve Neighborhood Representation
» Recruitment, Training Programs Help Increase Representation Among Women, Latino Candidates
» Goleta’s Public Engagement Commission Tasked with Increasing Participation in Local Government
» District Elections Did Not Increase Santa Barbara Turnout Much, But Even-Year Voting Should Help
» Making the Nooz: Noozhawk Digs Into Santa Barbara’s District Elections
About This Project
Noozhawk’s Report on Santa Barbara District Elections investigates the goals and outcomes of the City of Santa Barbara’s current system for choosing City Council members. Staff writers and editors collaborated on a series of stories, and we hope readers like you will contribute ideas and feedback for future reporting on the subject.
Additional stories in this series, to be published over the next two weeks, will examine neighborhood representation; recruitment and training programs for candidates; and the city’s upcoming change to even-year elections.
Santa Barbara has conducted three district elections, more than any other local municipality, and lessons learned from its implementation could help achieve the goals of the effort: improving voter and candidate participation to create a city government that better represents the diversity of its residents.
This project was reported with help from the Solution Journalism Network’s Renewing Democracy grant.
— Noozhawk staff writer Joshua Molina can be reached at jmolina@noozhawk.com. Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.
