Two years ago Carlsbad’s city Council voted unanimously to let
a billionaire L.A. developer bring a traffic-laden supermall nightmare to the unsullied
shores of the city’s Agua Hedionda Lagoon.
The Council could have allowed 30 days for citizen feedback
before approving the project, or schedule a special election to determine its
fate. But all five council members chose to ignore the pleas of outspoken
opponents at the August 25, 2015 Council meeting. Mayor Matt Hall claimed naysayers
were led by outside interests.
He was wrong. Citizen action launched an initiative drive leading
to the defeat of Measure A, a special election that stopped the developer in
his tracks, wrangled an apology from the mayor, and replaced a hapless council member
with the election of Cori Schumacher, a leader in the “No on A” campaign.
Fast-forward to this year’s May 9 meeting, where city
leaders, on a 3 to 2 vote, bowed to the threat of a lawsuit charging the city
with violating the California Voting Rights Act with its at-large elections.
Three council members, responsible enough to recognize the
city’s risk of losing millions in a lawsuit, voted to adopt by-district
elections. But Mayor Hall and Councilmember Mark Packard chose the politically
popular path. They voted against the change, claiming abandoning at-large
elections would destroy the city’s famous leadership accord. After the city collapsed
in community divisiveness they could say, “We told you so.”
It came as no surprise to learn the two longest serving
beneficiaries of at-large elections were the ones most threatened by change.
They were unable, or unwilling, to recognize it was their cozy group-think that pitted
neighbor against neighbor in the unnecessary and costly community confrontation leading
to the vote on Measure A.
As it turns out, the process for creating maps of the four voting
districts has been largely responsible for restoring civility to Council
meetings.
It began with the hiring of a consultant, Douglas Johnson,
President and Founder of the National
Demographics Corporation, to draft voting district maps that comply with
the Federal Voting Rights Act and the California Voting Rights Act. Johnson, a
nationally recognized expert in demographics and mapping voting districts, created
three maps, dividing voters into four districts.
What was most impressive was the response to the city’s call
for citizen involvement. The invitation to submit recommendations, together
with detailed demographic data, made readily available on the city’s website, resulted
in eight maps from nine city residents.
At its July 18 meeting the Council adopted a map drawn by two
individuals who were on opposite sides of Measure A. Arnie Cohen had supported
the developer’s project. Brian Flock opposed it. They came together to draw up two maps for consideration.
Notably absent from the July 18 meeting was the angry
vitriol present at so many council meetings over the last two years. All public
speakers who explained their preferences that night based their opinions on
data, rather than self-interest.
Will district elections destroy Carlsbad’s community spirit,
as Hall and Packard claim?
Before voting on the districting map, Packard, as if on cue,
quoted the mayor. “The Mayor last time pointed out the history that whenever
you go to a district…the elected officials quickly go to seeking only the
interests of the district, opposed to the interests of the overall community
and history has proven that…”
Before casting his vote, Mayor Hall echoed his fellow old
guard member. “What’s made Carlsbad really great is that you’ve each had five
people in the past who represent you. So, if our views choose to differ today
you’ve got four others to try to align yourself with.”
Without giving their sources, Hall and Packard claim history
shows district elections are invariably divisive to communities. Not according
to the National League of
Cities, which lists on their website the disadvantages of at-large
elections, as well as the advantages of district elections, both ignored by Carlsbad’s
two longtime council members.
According to the NLC, “At-large elections can weaken the
representation of particular groups, especially if the group does not have a
citywide base of operations or is an ethnic or racial group concentrated in a
specific area. District council members are more sensitive to the small but
important problems of their constituents, like waste disposal. District
elections may improve citizen participation because a council member who
represents a specific district may be more responsive to their constituency.”
In Carlsbad’s 2006 election Hall won election to the council
with 35% of the vote, Packard with 30%. Each was expected to represent the best
interests of 100% of voters.
At-large elections may lead to collaboration among council members,
since they know it takes only a plurality of voters to keep them in office. It
explains why at-large incumbents are rarely defeated.
In addition to giving more power to smaller communities in less
politically influential neighborhoods, district elections open the door to candidates
who are not members of the city’s old guard political network, or do not have
pockets deep enough to self-fund citywide campaigns.
Take the position of mayor, for example, which will remain
at-large. Matt Hall has already begun raising money to fund his campaign for
reelection next year. According to his campaign committee’s latest financial disclosure
statement, he’s already raised $51,000.
Half of that amount came from five donors. Add another $50,000, unspent and carried
over from his 2014 campaign to 15 more months of fundraising, and it should come
as no surprise if he winds up running unopposed.
As for council member campaigns, the four winning candidates in
the last two elections raised a total of $150,000. The cost to campaign in districts
one-fourth the size of the city might be expected to fall below $10,000.
It will take more than district elections alone to keep big
money developers and old guard cronyism at bay in Carlsbad. To do that will take
limits on campaign contributions and terms of office.
No surprise that they are trying to force Cori out by putting her district up first. It won't work. I live in La Costa and I will support her in any way I can even if I can't vote for her. Same goes for a lot of other people who pay attention to what is going on at City Hall.
ReplyDeleteDon:
DeleteI have to confess I've been out of town and tuned out of things since the distillery debacle, but cannot disagree with your assessment. What's a bit more disturbing are some of the antics of TPTB to create a pretext for the distillery to occur.