The City of Hollister had three measures on Tuesday’s ballot, and the voters sent messages of both change and caution.
Measure B was the proposal to redistrict the city from the current five districts to four larger districts and add a mayor at-large elected to represent the city as a whole. This would leave the city council with five seats but, we expect, a better and more focused view of the city’s overall needs. Voters agreed and approved Measure B overwhelmingly, 71 percent to 29 percent.
Measure C asked the voters if an at-large mayor should have a term of two years or four years. Once again, the voters were decisive – they selected two years overwhelmingly, 63 percent to 37 percent.
Taken together, the votes for Measure B and Measure C mean that the citizens want better representation, but based on their experience they want that representation to be more responsive to their wishes. They are wary about making a mistake and electing the wrong person only to be saddled with that error for four years. They want change, but they also want a safety valve. This echoes much of the national attitude: Let’s limit the downside risk because we do not have wiggle room.
Finally, there was Measure D, which would have allowed the city to appoint, rather than elect, the city treasurer, really an administrative position. The voters rejected that proposal 55.4 percent to 44.6 percent. Appointing a treasurer has the potential of saving some money in the end, and no one ran for the office the last two times anyway so it ended up as an appointed position by default. The change would have just eliminated some of the postings and other regulatory steps needed prior to elections.
Since there were no arguments in favor or against Measure D, it looks like the voters did not fully understand the change and they were not going to vote for something they did not understand. Measure D should have been a slam-dunk, and a simple explanation for the measure would have done it. But having the electorate exercise some caution is probably more important than the measure, and may be a good sign when all things are considered. We can always come back at the next citywide election and do that one right.
