Huntington Beach Measure A

Measure A would change Huntington Beach's charter (like a constitution for cities) to allow the city to require voters to show identification in municipal elections starting in 2026. It would also allow the city to monitor ballot drop boxes and add 20 new voting locations dispersed throughout the city.

Finally, it would change the charter to establish that, in the case of a conflict between the city's election rules and state election code, city rules would prevail. (Note that this proposal has been referred to at times as Charter Amendment Measure 1, in election documents, with Huntington Beach Mayor Gracey Van Der Mark urging voters to "Please vote YES on Charter Amendement Measure 1").

Official title on the ballot: Measure A, City of Huntington Beach, Charter Amendment Measure No. 1

Understanding the measure

Measure A does not specifically address ID requirements for voting by mail. It also does not state what type of ID would be required.

The state of California generally does not require voters to show identification in order to cast their vote — with the exception of first-time voters who did not provide their driver's license number, state identification number, or the last four digits of their Social Security number when registering.

If a voter didn’t provide this information, a poll worker can ask them to show one of a long list of potential documents to verify their identity before voting in person.

Keep in mind, Measure A "allows" the city to require voter ID in local elections, but it doesn't require them to do it. Mayor Gracey Van Der Mark, who supports the measure, told LAist if the measure passes, city leaders would have further discussions to work out the details, including which types of ID would be acceptable.

She also said the ID requirement is not intended to apply to voting by mail, although there is no such exclusion specified in the text of the measure.

The history behind it

California's attorney general and top election official have warned Huntington Beach that requiring voter ID would violate state law. They noted that voter ID requirements have historically been used to disenfranchise eligible voters, especially low-income people and people of color.

In November, a Huntington Beach resident challenged the measure in court, seeking to keep it off the ballot. They argued that requiring voter ID violates state election law and Californians' right to vote.

Superior Court Judge Nico Dourbetas ruled that voters should be allowed to weigh in on the measure first. If voters approve it and the city begins implementation, then it may be appropriate for the court to weigh in on whether it violates the Constitution, Dourbetas ruled.

What supporters say

Supporters say the measure would restore voters' trust in the election process and ensure that only verified registered voters are casting ballots. They also say that changing the city charter would ensure that it supersedes state election law for municipal elections.

What opponents say

Opponents of Measure A argue that, if passed, it could force the city to run its own elections, rather than relying on county infrastructure, which could cost local taxpayers millions of dollars.

They also say the measure is likely to be challenged in court, which would be costly.

They also say the proposal to have the city monitor dropboxes is a form of voter intimidation.

Potential financial impact

In his required impartial analysis of the measure, City Attorney Michael Gates wrote that the measure would lead to an "undetermined" increase in costs to the city.

However, last year city staff calculated the potential costs to add additional voting locations, check voter IDs and monitor ballot dropboxes to be at least $89,000. That's in addition to the approximately $319,000 to $383,000 the city currently pays the Orange County Registrar of Voters to administer elections.

Staff also estimated how much it would cost if the city had to run its own elections rather than continue to rely on the Orange County Registrar of Voters. They estimated initial startup costs, including purchasing equipment at $664,000 to $858,000. They estimated the recurring cost to hold each new election at $689,000 to $832,000 per election.

Further reading

• Huntington Beach election page — official ballot statement, impartial analysis, arguments for and against
• Measure A IS Measure 1: Why There Are Two Names for Huntington Beach's Voter ID Measure
• Protect HB, a group opposed to the ballot measures
• Huntington Beach’s New Conservative Council Bans Pride Flag On City Property (LAist)
• The Pride Flag Is Gone. Library Books Are Under Review. It’s A New Era Of Backlash Politics In California (CalMatters/LAist)

Measure B

Measure B would add a section to Huntington Beach's charter to limit the city's display of flags on city property to government and military flags, along with the POW/MIA flag, and, around the Summer Olympic Games, the Olympic flag.

Official title on the ballot: Measure B, City of Huntington Beach, Charter Amendment Measure No. 2

Understanding the measure

Measure B would make a nearly identical ordinance, passed by the city council in February 2023, more permanent. At that time, the city council also rescinded an earlier council decision to fly the rainbow Pride flag each spring.

The measure would also amend the city's charter to require a unanimous vote from city council members to display any other flag on city property.

What supporters say

Supporters say government flags best represent unity and equality, and that the measure will ensure no flags are flown that favor particular groups.

What opponents say

Opponents say the real purpose of the measure is to make it nearly impossible to fly the Pride flag on city property. They also note that the PIO/MIA flag is not a government flag and represents a particular group, and therefore its inclusion as a permissible flag contradicts supporters' arguments.

Potential financial impact

None stated in the official ballot measure analysis. But some opponents, especially those who consider it a ban on the Pride flag, argue that the policy gives Huntington Beach a reputation for being unwelcome to LGBTQ+ communities and could drive away business. After the city passed its 2023 flag ordinance, Blue Shield of California Foundation decided not to have its summer retreat in the city, saying it was “antithetical to our mission and values as an organization and a funder.”

More reading

• Huntington Beach election page — official ballot statement, impartial analysis, arguments for and against
• Citywide flag policy adopted April 18, 2023
• Huntington Beach Officials Ban Pride Banner at City Properties Under New Flag Restrictions (Voice of OC)
• As Huntington Beach restricts pride flag, health foundation pulls event from city (OC Register)

Measure C

Measure C would change the rules for filling city council vacancies, require the city to adopt a two-year, or biennial, budget, and change the rules for canceling city council meetings.

Official title on the ballot: Measure C, City of Huntington Beach, Charter Amendment Measure No. 3

Understanding the measure

Currently, if there's a vacancy on the Huntington Beach City Council in the middle of a four-year term, the council can appoint someone to the seat, and that person would serve out the remainder of the term. This measure would change the city's charter so that anyone appointed to fill a vacant city council seat would only serve until the next municipal election.

Depending on when a seat becomes vacant, that could mean an appointee serves less time on city council than they do under current policy.

Measure C would also allow the mayor or a majority of city council members to cancel a city council meeting. It also specifies that at least one city council meeting must be held each month. Currently, the city's charter requires the council to hold meetings twice a month.

The measure would also require the city to adopt a two-year budget rather than an annual budget. According to an analysis of the proposal by city staff, half of the biggest cities in Orange County make their budgets on a two-year cycle.

What supporters say

Supporters say adopting a two-year budget cycle would give city departments greater stability and allow for longer-term planning. They also say it would give city leaders more time to debate priorities in the budget and give residents more transparency into how the city is spending public dollars.

On changing the policy around city council vacancies, supporters of Measure C say it will ensure that appointees who aren't elected by voters don't remain in office for more than two years without standing for election. This part of the ballot measure was prompted, at least in part, by the resignation of former Councilmember Tito Ortiz in 2021, just seven months after he was elected. Ortiz was replaced by Councilmember Rhonda Bolton.

The charter changes allowing the mayor or city council majority to cancel a meeting, and the new policy to fill council vacancies, were part of ballot measures rejected by voters in 2022.

What opponents say

Opponents of Measure C say it's hypocritical for some of the same leaders who urged a "no" vote then to support the ideas now.

On the two-year budget, some opponents argue that it would make it harder for the city to limit spending if economic conditions worsen in the middle of a budget cycle.

Potential financial impact

According to an analysis from city staff on the possibility of switching to a biennial budget, the primary fiscal impact would be in the form of staff time. Adopting a two-year budget could decrease the amount of time staff have to spend each year preparing a budget. But, they noted, any time savings could be wiped out by the need to review and adjust the budget after the first year.

Also, the change would likely require staff training and updates to accounting software.

More reading

• Huntington Beach election page — official ballot statement, impartial analysis, arguments for and against