In a split vote, the San Fernando City Council has taken the first step toward moving the city’s election day from its current November date to align with the statewide primaries, which will cost $75,000 to do, despite objections raised by community members. With this initial vote, city staff were instructed to draft a proposed ordinance to change the elections with the expectation that the council will vote on the proposal within the next month.
Rosa Ruvalcaba, a small business owner in the city, said voter participation is already lower than the rest of Los Angeles County, and shifting the date away from November – when people tend to be most civically engaged – could further impact it.
“This change, I think, also diminishes the voices of our residents,” Ruvalcaba said. “For example, my elderly parents are always used to voting during November elections, so … changing our date could change the voices of our community.”
Walter Garcia, who serves as a spokesperson for state Attorney General Rob Bonta and was speaking in his personal capacity, said he’s observed several cities in California, mostly right-leaning, that have moved forward with initiatives that make it more difficult for people to vote, adding that it’s what the Donald Trump administration is doing.
He asked the dais if they wanted to be associated with something that not only makes it harder for people’s voices to be heard, but is also costly.
“We ought to be doing, in every city across California, what we can to make it easier for folks to cast their ballot,” Garcia said. “So the question is, do we want to do the right thing and make it easier for folks to vote … or do we want to make it challenging for people and only allow fewer votes to actually matter when it comes to voting folks in your position into office?”
The matter was presented in a Sept. 2 meeting, which was agendized by Mayor Mary Mendoza and after an hour-long discussion of the item, the council came to a 3-2 vote. Mendoza and Councilmembers Joel Fajardo and Victoria Garcia supported the item, while Vice Mayor Mary Solorio and Councilmember Patty Lopez voted no.
Solorio was the most outspoken about the agenda item, saying she was extremely disappointed that it was brought before the City Council. She said the proposal raises serious concerns, as it would directly affect voter participation, candidate access and the length of service of the current office holders.
Her main concern is that moving the date would result in lower voter turnout and narrower participation. She shared that the City of San Fernando used to hold elections in March in odd-numbered years. The council voted in 2018 to move the date to align with the general election following the signing of Senate Bill (SB) 415 by former Gov. Jerry Brown.
The bill restricts cities from holding an election on any date other than a statewide election date if an election on a nonconcurrent date resulted in a significant decrease in voter turnout.
In 2015, the same year the bill was signed, voter turnout in the City of San Fernando was less than 13%. In 2017, the city’s last election in an odd-numbered year in March, it was about 16%. But in the November 2018 election, participation increased to 50%.
“How many voices could potentially be silenced [by this move]?” Solorio asked. “Even if we look at the lowest voter turnout [from city residents] in a November election, which is about 4,640, it is still double that of the highest voter turnout in over 10 years in a March election.”
Yet despite public comments against changing the date and Solorio’s statistics about improved voter turnout in November, her fellow council members argued for making the change.
Mendoza said that moving the date to coincide with the state primaries is a better time for the municipal elections to take place.
“The candidates, first and foremost, will give the voters the opportunity to get to know [them] for who they really are, which to me is really important,” Mendoza said. “I want to know who I’m voting for and what they stand for.”
Mendoza added that she’s spoken to many City of San Fernando residents, who have told her that they receive so many mailers from multiple candidates during a general election that they end up throwing them all away. The result, she said, is that residents don’t know who the candidates are and end up confused when it comes time to cast their ballot.
Fajardo supported the item, saying that in the 2020 and 2022 elections, there was an “extraordinary amount of money” that was used to influence the race. He expressed how grassroots candidates will have a tougher time campaigning against opponents with more financial backing, and candidates with more money are less incentivized to go knocking door-to-door in the city and actually engage with residents.
By moving the election date to the primaries, Fajardo argued it gives grassroots candidates a better chance of winning without having to side with corporate interests against the community.
“I don’t make this decision in mind with anything that has to do with whether I run or not [in the next election],” Fajardo said. “It’s about what future generations of candidates look like, and I’m terrified of a system that encourages people only to run if they’ve made the right backdoor deals, if they’ve made promises with businesses so they will get the money.”
Lopez agreed with many of Fajardo’s points; however, she took issue with the $75,000 cost to move the election to the primary calendar. She questioned why council members who have complained about the cost of certificates – about $1,000 – are in support of this decision that would cost the city significantly more money.
Garcia sided with Fajardo, saying that in her experience running for office, campaigning was easier during the primaries than the general election because there were fewer distractions from local issues.
“I just think that a person who wants change, a person who’s going to put in the work, has a better shot in the primary, and that’s what we want,” Garcia said. “I think we should … really try to kick up the number of voters in the primary. That should be a goal that we have. We do want more people to vote, but nobody’s being suppressed. Nobody’s being stopped from voting.”