BIG SNORE: The quick and easy takeaway from this week’s Santa Barbara City elections is a yawn, and there are good reasons a lot of people think so. But if you squint just a little, the results become more complicated than that. There’s evidence, admittedly modest, that district delivered some of the goods their supporters promised.
Let’s dispense with the obvious. Voter turnout was only 35 percent. That’s worse than any election since 2007, when City Hall took over the responsibility of running its own elections in the belief it could do so better — and cheaper — than County Elections. A ho-hum vibe was much in evidence election night. Only one councilmember bothered to show up at City Hall for the ballot tabulating, normally a political high holy day of obligation for the see-and-be-seen crowd. Only one councilmember not seeking reelection made the scene — Bendy White. There were two ex-mayors and one county supervisor. Were it not for the tsunami of Santa Barbara City College journalism students dispatched there by Josh Molina — their teacher and a Noozhawk reporter — the place would have resembled a handful of loose peas rolling around on a very large platter.
This marked the first time in 47 years city voters elected candidates according to geographical districts. The change came about under threat of a lawsuit City Hall would surely have lost. After that settlement was reached in March, exceedingly little time was left for the dueling political machines to find and field candidates for the three districts up for grabs. That’s half the districts carved out under the settlement — the next three and the mayor’s come up two years hence — and lots of voters were confused.