In a repeat of their meeting held last month, the San Fernando City Council was split as they approved the first reading of an ordinance to move the city’s election date from November to the primaries, but were more united when it came to increasing the city’s water rate.
The public hearing and vote are part of the process prescribed to move the city’s election day from the general election date in November to coincide with the statewide primaries – which are held in June, but during a presidential election, are moved to March.
Changing the election day will shorten the terms for each councilmember by a minimum of five months. The move will also cost $75,000, but city staff clarified that this is not in addition to what they are already spending. This is the cost of holding an election during the primary. In a November general election, the cost of an election is approximately $36,000.
The vote to move the election date once again was 3-2: Mayor Mary Mendoza and Councilmembers Joel Fajardo and Victoria Garcia in support, while Vice Mayor Mary Solorio and Councilmember Patty Lopez were against it.
The ordinance will receive a second reading later this month before it’s presented to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for its approval.
The arguments for and against the proposed ordinance remained unchanged among the councilmembers. Mendoza, Fajardo and Garcia expressed that holding the election during the primaries will reduce the impact that corporations and candidates with large financial backing will have on the race while also giving more grassroots candidates a better chance of winning.
“[San Fernando] is a very political city … and it makes it tough for anyone new just trying to be a part of the community … and improve the quality of life of its residents,” Mendoza said. “But if we have it in June, maybe you have a little bit of a chance to get in because you’re going to have that opportunity for the residents to get to know you,” Mendoza continued. “I want anyone who has an interest in our city, for the betterment of our community.”
The two against it, however, argued that moving the date comes with too many negatives. Solorio pointed to the low voter turnout rates before 2017, when the City of San Fernando held its elections in March on odd-numbered years, which were less than 20%. These rates significantly increased when the election day was moved to November in 2018, climbing to 50%.
Lopez focused on the cost, calling the extra $39,000 that would be spent a waste of money, especially as the city has other issues that need to be addressed.
“Don’t mislead the public. Tell the truth [about] what’s behind this,” Lopez said. “It’s a political movement for helping your friends, not people like myself, not people who don’t speak English well.”
Comments from the public were also divided. Walter Garcia, a Pacoima resident, said there is no need to move the election day. He disagreed with the notion that moving the date of the primaries would lessen the impact of special interest groups’ spending.
“Money could still flood in. In fact, maybe it’s easier … because there aren’t many other races that are being considered,” he said. “The idea that this is somehow going to help the person who wants to work hard alone is not true in my opinion.”
Former Councilmember Sylvia Ballin had the opposite view, saying the city was a “disadvantaged community” and its races are buried at the bottom of the November ballot, with the outcomes often decided by who has the most support from a political action committee (PAC).
“By moving our elections to June, we give our residents a clearer voice,” Ballin said. “We give good candidates, those who are motivated by service rather than money, a fairer chance to connect with voters, and we ensure that our city government reflects the people it serves.”
A Water Rate Increase
Earlier in the meeting, the council discussed increasing the city’s water rate. Under the proposed rates, there would be a 5% increase per year over the next five years. For example, residents with a 1-inch meter pay about $113 under the current rate – but by 2030, they could be paying close to $137.
City staff noted that for some meter sizes, the rates would actually decrease in the first year before they rise in the second year.
Sewer rates would be increased by 3% in the same timeframe. The current rate for multi-unit residential homes is $62, but would rise to approximately $77 by 2030. Similar to the water meters, rates for commercial properties would decrease in the first year before increasing the following year.
Water and sewer utilities require a $1 million annual investment to ensure quality service, according to city staff and operating costs are increasing by about 4% per year.
In line with Proposition 218, also known as the Right to Vote on Taxes Act, customers have a right to protest any increase in fees. Notices were sent to residents 45 days before the meeting, and if they disagreed, they could submit written protests.
By the evening of the meeting, the city had received 479 written protests. However, the total needed to prevent the motion from going forward was 2,630.
The motion passed by a 3-1-1 vote after the council came back from a recess – Mendoza, Solorio, and Fajardo in favor and Lopez voting against. Victoria Garcia did not return from the recess in time for the vote.