Glendale Community College board leans toward March elections
A change in the election schedule may be coming to Glendale Community College, with the school’s trustees leaning in one direction for new dates, though they have not made a final decision.
David Viar, Glendale Community College’s president/superintendent, laid out two plans that would merge the college’s election dates with those of the statewide elections during a board meeting this past Tuesday.
Currently, the college holds elections in odd-numbered years, but it could change to even-numbered years to align with the state elections.
The first option elongates the terms for trustees elected in 2015 by 11 months. So, rather than having an election in April 2019, a new date of March 2020 would match up with state primaries.
Subsequently, those elected in 2017 would also have 11 months added to their tenures and would be up for reelection in March 2022.
The second option calls for a 19-month extension and switches to California general elections in November of 2020 and 2022.
“The general purpose [is] to improve and encourage voter turnout, particularly for municipal and local elections,” Viar said.
A change is necessary because the board is one of many governing bodies scrambling to become compliant with the California Voter Participation Act, which was signed into law in 2015 and goes into effect Jan. 1.
The act stipulates that a political subdivision cannot hold elections outside of a statewide date if the last election results were at least 25% smaller than that of the previous four statewide elections.
Viar said the difference easily crosses the threshold for the college’s past four elections.
Viar also said that if the college did not change its election cycle, it runs the risk of being taken to court.
“I’m not very comfortable with 19 months. That seems a little bit self-serving,” Board member Yvette Vartanian Davis said.
As for which option to choose, the trustees tended to lean toward lining up with state primaries.
“Looking at the big picture and what’s in the best interest of the college and the best interest of trustees being elected by our electorate, I think that looking at the March date is a better date because I think we’ll get more participation,” Ann Ransford, the board’s vice president, said.
Board member Anthony P. Tartaglia said he thought March was favorable over November because there would be less confusion for voters.
“Clutter on the election ballot is bad enough or hard enough to get constituents to vote for community college [issues] because we generally tend to be at the last of the ballot,” he said.
Viar backed Tartaglia by adding, “[The] only propositions going on the March ballot are those put on the ballot by the state legislators. All citizen-initiated initiatives must now go on the ballot in November. A large number of propositions will be on in November.”
Board member Yvette Vartanian Davis said she had a different concern.
“I’m not very comfortable with 19 months,” she said of the other proposed extension of terms. “That seems a little bit self-serving.”
The views held by board members coincide with those of the Glendale City Council, which on Nov. 7 decided to amend the city charter to move municipal elections to the March primary cycle, beginning in 2020.
Glendale residents will have a chance to vote on that proposed change in April.
Glendale Community College trustees are expected to make their decision at their next board meeting on Dec. 19.
Viar said Glendale Unified school board members are expected to discuss moving the district’s election dates during their next meeting on Tuesday.
While Glendale Unified and Glendale Community College are not bound by decisions made by the City Council, the savings if all three entities consolidated their elections would be substantial.
According to a report by Viar, “[The Los Angeles] County estimate of election costs for the city, GUSD and GCC consolidating in March is approximately $250,000 , and for November would be approximately $235,000.”
Glendale Community College paid approximately 27% of the last municipal election’s costs this year, which totaled $159,606. A move to either statewide election date would save the college roughly $90,000.
