Measure A opponents question analysis

ERIC LINDBERG
DAILY SOUND STAFF WRITER

Opponents to Measure A, a ballot measure that will switch municipal elections to even years, decried the upcoming ballot’s official impartial analysis written by City Attorney Steve Wiley, saying it favors the measure.
Wiley said the analysis is impartial and points out the potential effects of the measure in a straightforward manner.

James Kahan, a local attorney who helped write the ballot argument against Measure A, said Wiley's use of figures that the County of Santa Barbara has said it would have charged Santa Barbara to host the odd-year elections is improper and that he has found no examples of potential fiscal impact included in any other ballot analyses.
County Registrar of Voters Joe Holland confirmed that the figures Wiley used, between $500,000 and $600,000, are the county's best estimate of how much it would cost to host an odd-year election for the city.
"We didn't want to underestimate and then have to come back with a higher cost," Holland said. "...If people want to keep elections in odd years, that's fine. It's just going to cost them more."
Wiley said he used those figures simply to show how much money the city will likely save if the city decides to let the county host the elections. Although the city is hosting the election this November, the City Council will have to decide if they want to continue that practice for future elections, he said.
"That's all I was trying to point out," Wiley said, calling the blowback from Measure A opponents "all politics."
Wiley said even if city staff continue to host elections, it will cost the city about $300,000 every year. Switching elections to even years will bring that cost down to between $30,000 and $60,000, Holland said, since they will share the cost with federal, state and other local election cycles.