ARTICLE
We are just seven months away from the March 2024 primary election cycle. Behind the scenes, discussions are taking place at both the local and state levels as incumbents and new candidates declare their intention to run for office. Silent movements are afoot concerning ballot measures in the city, county, and state that could significantly impact Santa Cruz County residents and California voters. Why initiate a discussion months ahead of the election? The shift of the election date to March triggers an early scramble to vie for attention. When the California legislature once again moved the Presidential primary election to March, departing from the usual June schedule, the aim was to provide California voters with a more influential role in selecting each party's presidential nominee. What we are now poised to witness is a state-to-state debate between the two parties leading up to Super Tuesday, scheduled for March 5, during which several states will choose their candidates. The focus of this article revolves around how moving the election to March has a perplexing impact on Santa Cruz County voters. The outcome may or may not prove beneficial in maintaining a stable financial foundation for our central coast. To recite the Chamber’s long-standing policy about elections — the Santa Cruz County Chamber does not endorse or oppose an individual candidate’s run for office at any level. Our mission is to provide advocacy for important issues that affect the success of all Santa Cruz County businesses, as well as provide information for economic decision-making and access to meaningful connections. Elections wield substantial influence over the future appearance of the community, as newly elected leaders determine courses of action on matters ranging from taxes, fees, and infrastructure to housing projects and day-to-day operations within the halls of City Hall. These decisions possess the capacity to alter the trajectory of our community. Let's delve into the ongoing developments within the City of Santa Cruz, where the electorate in 2022 opted for the establishment of six districts and the direct election of a Mayor. Fred Keeley assumed the role of Mayor, embarking on a four-year term spanning from 2023 to 2027. Come March 2024, the city's voters will participate in four district elections. As of now, the complete roster of candidates for these four district seats remains unknown. Prospective candidates must submit their filings on or before December 8, 2023, to secure a place on the ballot for the March 5, 2024 election. Here is a specific link to the important dates for candidates: City of Santa Cruz Important Candidate dates. There is a similar calendar of important dates for ballot measures: City of Santa Cruz Important dates for ballot measures. In two of the city council districts, incumbent Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson has announced she is running in District 3 and UCSC student Joe Thompson is entering the race in District 5. It is certain others will pull papers in the other open district races. In the past city council elections where candidates ran city-wide, it was not unusual to have a dozen or more candidates on the ballot. With district elections, we anticipate that there will be fewer candidates who must focus on a smaller section of the city. Certainly, there will be individuals who file candidacy papers for the remaining vacant district races. In previous city council elections, where candidates contested citywide, it was not uncommon to witness a dozen or even more candidates listed on the ballot. With the transition to district elections, we expect that there will be fewer contenders. This adjustment necessitates candidates to concentrate their efforts on a more confined area within the city. You can see the City Council District map: City of Santa Cruz Council District Map As you can imagine, just like a new business launching a product or sales promotion or opening a new storefront — timing is everything. The difference here is the election cycle (public vetting process), discussion about policy issues, candidate’s statement of priorities, campaign paper filing and fundraising reporting are supposed to be open and transparent. Let’s keep an eye on which individuals announce their candidacy in Santa Cruz in the coming weeks. At the county level, three county board of supervisor seats are open with long-time incumbents Bruce McPherson and Zach Friend announcing earlier this summer that they will not run for re-election. This implies that we are poised to welcome two fresh faces to the Board of Supervisors, with the potential for a third if incumbent Manu Koenig fails to retain his position. Early indications suggest the likelihood of announcements for the two available seats. City of Capitola council member Kristin Brown has initiated the process to vie for Supervisor Friend's seat, while Monica Martinez, CEO of Encompass Community Service, has pursued a similar path for Supervisor McPherson's seat. Lani Faulkner, a bioscientist and active member of the Santa Cruz Chapter of the Sierra Club, has also commenced a campaign against Manu Koenig. There are murmurs within the community hinting at the emergence of other potential candidates in the near future. Stay tuned. The March 2024 ballot will also include state ballot measures that are placed on the ballot by the state legislature if approved by the Governor. There are at least two measures circling the legislative process in Sacramento that are gaining media attention. And it is possible there will be more. Keep in mind that the state legislature made a determination a few years back that only state-legislative-sponsored ballot measures can go on the primary ballot and other measures sponsored by organizations or special interest groups would be placed on the November ballot if they successfully qualified with valid signatures of registered voters. This nuisance greatly divides the public sector and business community. Assemblyman Christopher Ward, supported by the new Speaker of the Assembly, Robert Rivas, introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment 13 (ACA 13). It would amend the constitution regarding raising taxes, by placing an additional burden to pass citizens’ initiatives that seek to enforce Proposition 13’s two-thirds vote requirement for local special tax increases. Another Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA 6) is an issue between the Labor Community and the University of California. However, the Chamber’s concern is with a new amendment relating to contracting out for services. UC is an anchor institution committed to creating new contracting opportunities for small, disadvantaged, women-owned, and minority businesses. These efforts fall within the University of California policy that requires contracts to be used only sparingly and as an option of last resort to address temporary or exigent circumstances, but not to displace University employees. Under the provisions of this bill, it would be nearly impossible for chamber members to do any business with the University. Therefore, the Chamber has written to the State Legislature to oppose ACA 6 as currently proposed.
We are just seven months away from the March 2024 primary election cycle. Behind the scenes, discussions are taking place at both the local and state levels as incumbents and new candidates declare their intention to run for office. Silent movements are afoot concerning ballot measures in the city, county, and state that could significantly impact Santa Cruz County residents and California voters.
Why initiate a discussion months ahead of the election? The shift of the election date to March triggers an early scramble to vie for attention. When the California legislature once again moved the Presidential primary election to March, departing from the usual June schedule, the aim was to provide California voters with a more influential role in selecting each party's presidential nominee. What we are now poised to witness is a state-to-state debate between the two parties leading up to Super Tuesday, scheduled for March 5, during which several states will choose their candidates.
The focus of this article revolves around how moving the election to March has a perplexing impact on Santa Cruz County voters. The outcome may or may not prove beneficial in maintaining a stable financial foundation for our central coast.
To recite the Chamber’s long-standing policy about elections — the Santa Cruz County Chamber does not endorse or oppose an individual candidate’s run for office at any level. Our mission is to provide advocacy for important issues that affect the success of all Santa Cruz County businesses, as well as provide information for economic decision-making and access to meaningful connections.
Elections wield substantial influence over the future appearance of the community, as newly elected leaders determine courses of action on matters ranging from taxes, fees, and infrastructure to housing projects and day-to-day operations within the halls of City Hall. These decisions possess the capacity to alter the trajectory of our community. Let's delve into the ongoing developments within the City of Santa Cruz, where the electorate in 2022 opted for the establishment of six districts and the direct election of a Mayor. Fred Keeley assumed the role of Mayor, embarking on a four-year term spanning from 2023 to 2027. Come March 2024, the city's voters will participate in four district elections. As of now, the complete roster of candidates for these four district seats remains unknown. Prospective candidates must submit their filings on or before December 8, 2023, to secure a place on the ballot for the March 5, 2024 election.
Here is a specific link to the important dates for candidates: City of Santa Cruz Important Candidate dates. There is a similar calendar of important dates for ballot measures: City of Santa Cruz Important dates for ballot measures.
In two of the city council districts, incumbent Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson has announced she is running in District 3 and UCSC student Joe Thompson is entering the race in District 5. It is certain others will pull papers in the other open district races. In the past city council elections where candidates ran city-wide, it was not unusual to have a dozen or more candidates on the ballot. With district elections, we anticipate that there will be fewer candidates who must focus on a smaller section of the city. Certainly, there will be individuals who file candidacy papers for the remaining vacant district races. In previous city council elections, where candidates contested citywide, it was not uncommon to witness a dozen or even more candidates listed on the ballot. With the transition to district elections, we expect that there will be fewer contenders. This adjustment necessitates candidates to concentrate their efforts on a more confined area within the city.
You can see the City Council District map: City of Santa Cruz Council District Map
As you can imagine, just like a new business launching a product or sales promotion or opening a new storefront — timing is everything. The difference here is the election cycle (public vetting process), discussion about policy issues, candidate’s statement of priorities, campaign paper filing and fundraising reporting are supposed to be open and transparent. Let’s keep an eye on which individuals announce their candidacy in Santa Cruz in the coming weeks.
At the county level, three county board of supervisor seats are open with long-time incumbents Bruce McPherson and Zach Friend announcing earlier this summer that they will not run for re-election. This implies that we are poised to welcome two fresh faces to the Board of Supervisors, with the potential for a third if incumbent Manu Koenig fails to retain his position. Early indications suggest the likelihood of announcements for the two available seats. City of Capitola council member Kristin Brown has initiated the process to vie for Supervisor Friend's seat, while Monica Martinez, CEO of Encompass Community Service, has pursued a similar path for Supervisor McPherson's seat. Lani Faulkner, a bioscientist and active member of the Santa Cruz Chapter of the Sierra Club, has also commenced a campaign against Manu Koenig. There are murmurs within the community hinting at the emergence of other potential candidates in the near future. Stay tuned.
The March 2024 ballot will also include state ballot measures that are placed on the ballot by the state legislature if approved by the Governor. There are at least two measures circling the legislative process in Sacramento that are gaining media attention. And it is possible there will be more. Keep in mind that the state legislature made a determination a few years back that only state-legislative-sponsored ballot measures can go on the primary ballot and other measures sponsored by organizations or special interest groups would be placed on the November ballot if they successfully qualified with valid signatures of registered voters. This nuisance greatly divides the public sector and business community.
Assemblyman Christopher Ward, supported by the new Speaker of the Assembly, Robert Rivas, introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment 13 (ACA 13). It would amend the constitution regarding raising taxes, by placing an additional burden to pass citizens’ initiatives that seek to enforce Proposition 13’s two-thirds vote requirement for local special tax increases.
Another Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA 6) is an issue between the Labor Community and the University of California. However, the Chamber’s concern is with a new amendment relating to contracting out for services. UC is an anchor institution committed to creating new contracting opportunities for small, disadvantaged, women-owned, and minority businesses. These efforts fall within the University of California policy that requires contracts to be used only sparingly and as an option of last resort to address temporary or exigent circumstances, but not to displace University employees. Under the provisions of this bill, it would be nearly impossible for chamber members to do any business with the University. Therefore, the Chamber has written to the State Legislature to oppose ACA 6 as currently proposed.