Our summary
Cites incumbents losing seats in each of the previous four election cycles and offers a critical paraphrase about term limits; does not explicitly answer whether Laguna should study the Seal Beach model.
“As demonstrated in the previous 4 election cycles, at least one incumbent was unseated in each election.”
Opening excerpt · written response. Full answer below.
Read full answer verbatim
“As demonstrated in the previous 4 election cycles, at least one incumbent was unseated in each election. I"ll paraphrase a quote I read recently: "Every discussion of term limits starts with a confession: We the voters can't figure out who to vote for so please put a fence around us".”
Written response · answer only
Our summary
Open to runoffs, ranked-choice voting and term limits, but says Laguna should not assume Seal Beach’s district model is the right fit.
“I am open to studying election reforms, including runoffs, ranked-choice voting and term limits, but I would not assume that Seal Beach's system is automatically right for Laguna Beach.”
Opening excerpt · written response. Full answer below.
Read full answer verbatim
“I am open to studying election reforms, including runoffs, ranked-choice voting and term limits, but I would not assume that Seal Beach's system is automatically right for Laguna Beach. Seal Beach elects one representative from each district; Laguna voters elect multiple councilmembers citywide. In a multi-seat election, voters may choose several candidates, so receiving votes on fewer than half of all ballots does not mean a majority voted against that candidate. Any review should identify the problem we are trying to solve and compare costs, voter participation, representation and unintended consequences. District elections could divide a small city into political boundaries, while a separate runoff would add expense and may reduce turnout. I support an open, evidence-based public discussion, but any major change should be clearly explained and decided by Laguna Beach voters.”
Written response · answer only
Our summary
Opposes Measure E and district elections. Says a majority threshold does not translate cleanly to a multi-seat at-large race; does not explicitly commit to studying other reforms.
“I'm voting no on Measure E. Term limits don't fix the problem this question identifies. A councilmember elected with 35 percent is elected with 35 percent whether it's their first term or their third.”
Opening excerpt · written response. Full answer below.
Read full answer verbatim
“I'm voting no on Measure E. Term limits don't fix the problem this question identifies. A councilmember elected with 35 percent is elected with 35 percent whether it's their first term or their third. As noted at the question debate, I'm proud to have gotten majority support in 2022. But a 50-percent threshold doesn't translate cleanly to an at-large race where every voter casts three votes. Seal Beach can require it because they elect one councilmember per district. Getting there here would mean districting, which I don't support.
District elections work where neighborhoods are distinct and separated. Laguna is seven square miles, and what decides elections here — the hospital, wildfire mitigation, environmental protection — affects every household. Districts would make representation narrower, not broader.”
Written response · answer only
