This is an archive of a past election.|
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/sd/ for current information.
City of Oceanside
Charter Amendment - Majority Approval Required
Fail: 12,546 / 43.0% Yes votes ...... 16,600 / 57.0% No votes
Index of all Propositions
|Information shown below: Yes/No Meaning | Impartial Analysis | Arguments | Full Text|
Shall the proposed amendment to the Charter of the City of Oceanside, to establish numbered, elected at-large seats; establish a June first-round election, and a November runoff election for any June election where no candidate receives over 50% for all elected offices, effective for the June 2014 election; establish a first-round election and runoff election if no candidate receives over 50% for any special election to fill a vacancy or recall election, effective upon passage, be adopted?
EXISTING LAW: Under current law, the City Council is composed of the mayor and four councilmembers who serve four year terms and are elected "at large," meaning they do not serve a specific district. The city treasurer and city clerk are also elected at large and serve four year terms. At each general municipal election in November, the two candidates for seats on the City Council who receive the highest number of votes are declared the winners even though the successful candidates may not receive majority voter approval. Similarly, under current law, the mayor, city clerk, and city treasurer may be elected at a November election with less than a majority provided they receive the highest number of votes for their specific office. A candidate for a city office at a special election or at a recall election is declared the winner after receiving the highest number of votes cast.
THE PROPOSAL The proposed charter amendment, if adopted, will change existing law by requiring candidates for all elected city offices to receive majority voter approval in order to be elected. Under the proposal, the mayor and city councilmembers, the clerk and the city treasurer will continue to be elected at large and will continue to serve four year terms. The charter amendment requires the city clerk to assign a number to each of the four council seats in June 2012. Candidates for city council will be required to declare the specific seat they are running for.
At the November 2012 election only, a candidate for an elected city office (including the mayor, councilmember, city clerk, and city treasurer) will be declared the winner if he or she receives the highest number of voters for the specific office. Beginning in 2014, primary elections will be conducted in June of each election year to elect candidates for open city offices. A candidate who receives majority voter approval at the June primary will be declared the winner. If no candidate receives majority voter approval at the June primary, a runoff between the top two candidates for the city office will be held in November. A candidate who receives majority voter approval at the November election will be declared the winner.
Finally, the proposed charter amendment will change the manner in which special elections and recall elections are conducted. If no candidates receives a majority voter approval at the special election or recall election, the top two candidates would face each other at a special runoff election. The candidate who receives a majority of the votes cast at the special run off election would be declared the winner.
UT San Diego
|Arguments For Proposition F||Arguments Against Proposition F|
|Vote Yes on Prop. F. Support majority elections for fairness and good governance. Voters can better hold elected officials accountable with a majority vote requirement to win an election.
Currently in the City of Oceanside, candidates for public office can be elected without receiving a majority of the votes from Oceanside voters. This is a seriously flawed method that allows a candidate to win with far less than a majority of the total votes cast.
In a previous city election, a candidate won office after receiving only 14% of the vote! Candidates that win by such narrow margins only have to pander to special interest supporters whose views may be dramatically out of touch with the majority of Oceanside residents. In contrast, candidates that have to win a majority of the votes will represent the majority of voters.
By voting Yes on Prop. F, Oceanside candidates will have to win "50% plus one vote" just as required for all congressional and state elections, the County of San Diego, the City of San Diego, and the City of Chula Vista.
Oceanside has grown in population to become a much larger city and majority elections are needed for a city our size.
Oceanside will face tough challenges for years to come regarding declining tax revenue, spending, ever increasing pensions, public safety, economic development, private sector job creation, and providing other basic city services. Common sense cries out that the elected officials making these decisions should do so with a voter mandate that can only come from winning a majority of the vote!
Please contact http://www.maiorityelections.com for additional information regarding Yes on Prop. F.
Join Oceanside residents and the San Diego County Taxpayers Association by voting Yes on Prop. F.
Prop F's "majority rule" is costly and confusing - and runs against the very principles of our United States and California Constitutions, which ensure representative government "for all." All our small businesses, communities and neighborhoods deserve representation.
Prop F is being hastily pushed through by a majority city council because they know their policies of cutting services to residents and giving away land and Taxpayer funds to their out-of-town multimillion dollar developer/corporate sponsors have been met with growing dissatisfaction by Oceanside Voters and Taxpayers.
The majority council has cut down public notices to residents regarding new development; moved to privatize our valuable public library; closed municipal swimming pool, park and critical public safety resource centers; cut youth, senior services; moved to privatize ambulance services with higher response times, threatening the lives of Oceanside residents by replacing paramedics/ firefighters with "cheaper" untrained personnel.
These expensive elections will lead to greater cuts in essential services.
Prop F will:
Require 2 election cycles, costing Oceanside Taxpayers additional hundreds of thousands of dollars;
Subject Oceanside to City of Bell fiscal abuses;
Take away Local Control.
Prop F violates the California Voting Rights Act - and will subject the City of Oceanside and Oceanside Taxpayers to millions of dollars in lawsuits!
"... CVRA lawsuits and threats of lawsuits have cost California taxpayers over $8 million."
Join thousands of your Oceanside neighbors - vote NO on Prop F!
|Vote NO on Prop F - a costly measure that will encourage corruption in Oceanside.
Prop F will require candidates running for Mayor, City Council, City Clerk and City Treasurer - non-partisan offices - to run in a June primary AND November general election, adding significant costs of an additional election to Oceanside Taxpayers, requiring cuts to our public library, pool, parks, afterschool programs, senior programs, pubic services and public safety.
In order to place Prop F on the June ballot, Oceanside Taxpayers are paying $70,000.
With Prop F, Oceanside Taxpayers will pay for an additional unnecessary election every 2 years.
The potential total Taxpayer cost of one of these elections = $210,000!
Councilmember Felien justified this waste by saying he wants "majority rule." Yet, Mayor Wood won by a supermajority - over 38,000 votes - and Felien refuses to acknowledge Mayor Wood's right to lead our city!
Felien's real motive - make it impossible to have true representation in Oceanside. With Prop F, a candidate will need to raise at least $200,000 - for a part-time Councilmember job that pays $25,000.
Where will the money come from? Out-of-town corporations/special interests. What will a candidate have to promise/do to get $200,000+? Sell out Oceanside.
Two years ago, out-of-town corporate special interests wrote and funded a city charter election in Oceanside, with no public input and no review by our city attorney. It passed with only 20% of Oceanside's 73,597 voters.
Felien rushed this costly June ballot measure on February 29th - the last possible date the city could add an item - with only 24 hours' public notice and no public review.
Why the rush?
Our Country was founded on constitutional principles of representation. It was the tyranny of the majority that forced our country to fight for freedom.
Vote NO on Prop F!
Prop F will require that candidates be elected by a majority of voters, not just a small plurality. Majority elections currently work well throughout the county, state, and country.
Prop F saves millions of tax dollars by forcing politicians to serve the whole city - not just pander to special interest groups!
While the opposition claims that elections are an inconvenience, Prop F ensures that voters have a stronger voice in government.
The cost of majority elections is miniscule, but the savings created through greater accountability to the majority are enormous.
In 2005, Mayor Wood, Councilwoman Sanchez, and Councilwoman Mackin - all elected with less than a majority - bowed to demands from a small, vocal opposition group by canceling the critically needed Rancho Del Oro interchange. Oceanside residents now have to waste time and gas fighting more traffic on College and El Camino Real for decades.
In 2010 Councilman Lowery and Councilwoman Sanchez, both elected without a majority of votes, joined Mayor Wood to approve one-sided union contracts that were over budget by $2,500,000. The city now has to cut public safety, parks, and libraries to pay for these contracts.
With Prop F, politicians elected with less than a majority of the vote can no longer hurt Oceanside residents with their pandering to public employee unions and other special interests.
Join Oceanside residents and the San Diego County Taxpayers Association by VOTING YES ON PROP F.
|Full Text of Proposition F|
Section 800. Application
Section 801. Municipal Elective Offices
The positions of City Clerk and City Treasurer shall be elected from the City at large at the times and in the manner provided in this Charter.
Effective in June 2012, each Council seat shall be numbered one (1) through four (4) respectively. The City Clerk shall be responsible for assigning numbers to each Council position. Persons seeking election to the City Council shall at the time of filing of nomination papers, select the specific numbered Council seat for which they seek election. Should a vacancy occur at any time in a Council seat, if the vacancy is to be filled by special election, candidates for the vacancy shall designate the specific numbered seat on their nominating paper.
The term of each member of the City Council, the Mayor, the City Clerk and City Treasurer shall be a period of four years.
For the general municipal election in 2012 only, the election for Council seats numbered one (1) and two (2), the Mayor, City Clerk and City Treasurer shall be conducted on the same date as the statewide election in November 2012. A candidate for any of these offices in November 2012 shall be deemed elected upon receipt of the highest number of votes cast for the particular office.
Effective with the general municipal election in 2014, the election for Council seats numbered one (1) through four (4), the Mayor, City Clerk and City Treasurer shall be conducted on the same date as the state primary election in June. A candidate for any of these municipal offices shall be deemed elected upon receipt of a majority of the votes cast for the particular office. If no candidate at the general municipal election receives a majority of the votes cast for the office, there shall be a runoff election between the two candidates receiving the highest and second highest number of votes for the particular office. The runoff election shall be held on the same date as the statewide election date in November immediately following the general municipal election. At the runoff election, the candidate receiving a majority of the votes cast for the particular office shall be deemed elected. Ties at the runoff election shall be resolved by lot.
Any candidate at any recall election or special election to fill a vacancy in any of Council seats numbered one (1) through four (4), or the Offices of Mayor, City Clerk or City Treasurer, shall be deemed elected upon receipt of a majority of the votes cast for the particular office. If no candidate at the recall election or special election receives a majority of the votes cast, there shall be a special runoff election between the two candidates receiving the highest and second highest number of votes for the particular office. The special runoff election shall be held on a date set by Council no longer than five months after the special election. Ties at the special runoff election shall be resolved by lot.