Civically Speaking is a weekly newsletter on the latest local government news from the lens of the Long Beach Post’s City Hall reporter, who sits through so many city meetings for us.
It might, but there’s nothing nefarious here
I know we’ve been talking a lot about ballot designations and candidate statements over the past few weeks but, hey, it’s election season! So, you can probably expect at least a few more entries before the March primary.
I saw something on the City Council’s agenda this week that I thought could use some explaining. The meeting lasted only a few minutes because the council was hurrying across the street to the annual gala known as “State of the City,” so I’m sure almost nobody else noticed it.
I’m talking about the council approving the March primary’s ballot order, where voters will see two incumbents — and two challengers whom incumbents are lining up behind in the upcoming election — listed first in their respective races.
Councilmembers Cindy Allen (2nd District) and Suely Saro (6th District), two of Mayor Rex Richardson’s most loyal allies, are at the top of the ballot in their respective races.
Two council hopefuls, Tunua Thrash-Ntuk (8th District), who helped run Richardson’s campaign for mayor, and Herlinda Chico (4th District), who received the endorsements of nearly every Democrat in the region when she last ran for council in 2015, are also listed first.
She’s running against incumbent Councilmember Daryl Supernaw, who’s listed second.
Seems convenient for the establishment-backed candidates, but let me explain how this happens. Each election, the California Secretary of State does a randomized reordering of the 26 letters in the alphabet and that dictates how candidates will be listed based on their last name. Long Beach uses the state’s drawing so Chico (8) is listed before Supernaw (16) and Allen is listed before Citterio (8) and Zaidi (19).
The numbers are drawn like a lottery and there are witnesses in the room, including the press. I know it looks like a “thing” but I’m here to tell you it’s not.
Why it could be important is another issue.
There’s conflicting research on whether being listed first on a ballot has a positive effect on that candidate’s chances of winning.
There are several examples of researchers finding that candidates listed first benefitted from that slot, but there are also some that say there is no difference, or that being listed last could be good for hopeful office seekers.
The way that candidates are listed varies by state, with some always listing the incumbents, major political party or even the first person to turn in their election paperwork first. I’m a fan of rewarding the early birds, but that’s not what California does, at least not since 1975.
That was the year that the state shifted from incumbents being listed first to the randomized alphabet approach. A California Supreme Court decision that year held that “a significant advantage accrues to a candidate by virtue of a top ballot position.”
It cited the work that looked at California elections and concluded that up to 5% of a candidate’s overall votes could be attributed to the top-of-the-ballot designation.
Most Long Beach elections don’t come down to razor-thin margins, but remember, candidates need only “50% plus one” to win an election. So, even single-digit margins could be significant.
Thankfully, none of these races include more than four candidates and we won’t have to worry about who will pop up on the first page and who could potentially be done in by the “more” button on voting machines. Remember, the city of Beverly Hills sued over this issue in 2020.
But there’s a good way to avoid any confusion that you might have when you open your ballot to vote later this year. Make sure to use the Long Beach Post’s Compare Your Candidates tool. We’ve sent out questionnaires to all the local candidates, and once we compile the answers, they’ll be available for you to easily compare side-by-side.
It could help you ensure that you’re voting for the right person for you, regardless of where they’re listed on the ballot.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS WEEK:
The City Council is scheduled (again) to vote on a proposed street vendor ordinance Tuesday night. The vote was delayed twice in 2023 as the council and city staff worked to revise the new law. Tuesday’s vote could raise the amount of insurance coverage the city will subsidize for the first year, with vendors being eligible for up to $450 in city funds. Once the law goes into effect, vendors will have to abide by new buffers that will prohibit them from operating too close to things like bus stops and intersections, setting up on sidewalks that are too narrow, or selling near the city-owned beach concession stands. Whether you love or hate street vendors, it appears the city will finally have some formal rules that they must follow in 2024.
PAY ATTENTION TO THIS NEXT WEEK:
It’s officially time to rid ourselves of that back-to-work hangover after the holidays and jump right into some important city meetings. The city is continuing its recent practice of holding community meetings before the budget is assembled for the coming fiscal year, and it says it wants your input. The first in-person meeting is scheduled for Jan. 17 at the Museum of Latin American Art at 6 p.m. If you’re not able to make it, there are three other in-person meetings and a virtual meeting before the end of the month. Now’s your time to tell the city what they should be spending tax dollars on. I’m sure I’ll see some of you out there. You can RSVP for the meetings here.