High Court to Decide Legality of Santa Cruz Election

The state Supreme Court agreed Thursday to decide a case that threatens to unseat the mayor of Santa Cruz and has implications for college towns throughout California.

All four sitting justices voted to review a Court of Appeal ruling that Santa Cruz Mayor Jane Weed won with illegal votes cast by as many as 193 students at the University of California, Santa Cruz. Weed won by a margin of 145 votes.

The students registered to vote while living in campus housing, but had moved off campus by election time and were living in temporary quarters, parking lots and woods near campus while they searched for permanent housing. Since they did not live at their old campus addresses, they could not legally vote until they found permanent housing and re-registered, the Court of Appeal said in a decision issued in November.

“This isn’t a case involving mere technical error or irregularities. . . . This case involves illegal votes which affected the results of the election of one candidate. We cannot validate her election,” the court said.

Weed, who won one of four open seats in the 1983 election, was challenged by a group of moderate voters who complained that the students voted improperly because they did not live at addresses listed on their voter registration forms.

The appellate court underscored the political significance of the student vote in small cities such as Santa Cruz by noting that liberal candidates and issues tend to win by 88% to 96% in precincts at the UC Santa Cruz campus, and such margins often sway elections in Santa Cruz.

“The university commonly marches overwhelmingly to one drum; and on issues with ideological overtones, it is a different drum from that which paces a majority of the rest of the city,” the court said.

Weed, whose term ends in 1988, is part of a four-member majority that she described as “progressive feminists.” It has been in control of the seven-member council since 1981. The majority’s platform includes such issues as limited development, spending for social programs and low-cost housing.

The mayor called the appellate court ruling “dangerous in this day and age when you see 50% of the eligible voters shining on voting.” Unless the high court overturns the decision, she said, the case would “close down the (voting) options” for students, military personnel, migrant farm workers and other people who move frequently.

The Supreme Court generally takes about six months before it hears arguments in cases under review and several additional months before it decides the case.