A Conversation with Andrea St. Julian

Interview by Peter Holmes

‍

When Andrea St. Julian talks about San Diego’s city government, she doesn’t mince words: the current system is failing residents, and it’s failing by design. An appellate attorney and co-founder of both San Diegans for Justice and The Justice Workshop, Andrea has spent years pushing for structural reforms that make local democracy actually work for the people it’s supposed to serve. She and her co-founder, Maresa Martin Talbert, are leading an effort to bring Choice Voting to San Diego, a reform designed to change the rules of elections so that city leaders are more representative of and more accountable to the people they serve.

‍

Peter Holmes:

You have spent years working on structural reforms in San Diego, including the creation of the Commission on Police Practices. What led you to focus on structural reforms in government rather than simply trying to change who holds office?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:

Many of the problems people see in government are not simply the result of bad actors. They are the result of how the system itself is designed. The rules of the system shape who runs for office, how campaigns are conducted, and how officials behave once they get elected.

‍

When the system concentrates power, limits competition, and disconnects residents from decision making, people end up frustrated regardless of who is in office. Changing individual leaders can help in the short term, but if the structure remains the same, the same problems tend to return.

‍

That’s why I focus on structural reform. Structural reforms can create a government that is more representative, more responsive, and more accountable to the people it serves. When you change the rules of the system, you change the incentives and the outcomes.

‍

Peter Holmes:

Many San Diegans feel shut out of city government and believe local government simply isn’t responsive to their needs. What’s behind that?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:

When you talk to people across San Diego, you hear the same thing again and again: People feel like their voices do not matter. Polling reflects that frustration. A recent poll showed that 78% of San Diegans believe corruption is a problem in local government and 70% say people like them have little influence on city government.

‍

Part of the problem is that our current political structure creates distance between residents and their representatives. Each councilmember represents an enormous number of people, and elections are often limited to a very small number of candidates who make it through the current system.

‍

The result is that many voters feel they are simply choosing between a narrow set of options rather than shaping the direction of our city. When people feel disconnected from the process, trust in government breaks down.

‍

Peter Holmes: ‍

San Diego has experienced a series of controversies over the years, from pension scandals to the 101 Ash Street debacle. Are these isolated failures, or do they point to deeper structural problems in how the city is governed?

‍

Andrea St. Julian: ‍

Most people would agree that San Diego has had its share of serious failures in local government for decades. They’re different in their details, but they all reveal something important about how the system is structured.

‍
When a system concentrates power in a small number of offices and elections are not very competitive, accountability becomes weaker. Fewer voices are at the table and fewer perspectives are represented when decisions are made.

‍
In systems like that, problems can go unnoticed longer than they should, and mistakes can become very costly before they are corrected. Structural reforms are not about blaming individuals. They are about creating a system where oversight is stronger, representation is broader, and accountability is built into the design of government.

‍

Peter Holmes:

San Diego currently has nine councilmembers representing a city of more than 1.4 million residents. How does the size of the council affect representation and responsiveness to neighborhoods across the city?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:

San Diego’s councilmembers represent far more people than is functionally appropriate. Each councilmember represents roughly 158,000 residents.

‍

When a representative serves that many people, it becomes very difficult to maintain close relationships with communities across such a large district. Constituent concerns can easily get lost simply because there are so many people to represent.

‍

Accepted functional benchmarks suggest that city councils function best when each member represents somewhere between 80,000 and 100,000 residents. Expanding the council allows representation to be distributed more broadly and allows more voices to participate in decision making.

‍

More representatives mean more perspectives, more oversight, and more opportunities for communities across the city to feel that they have someone at the table advocating for them.

‍

Peter Holmes:

You and your colleagues at The Justice Workshop are advocating for something called Choice Voting. What is Choice Voting and how does it work?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:

Choice Voting allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference instead of choosing only one candidate. Voters can select their first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on.

‍

If a voter’s top choice can’t win, their vote transfers to their next preferred candidate rather than being wasted. This allows voters to support the candidates they genuinely prefer without worrying about wasting their vote or splitting the vote.

‍

An example of the problem with split voting under our current system is playing out right now in California’s upcoming primary. Several Democratic candidates are running for governor, and there is real concern that the Democratic vote will be split so many ways that the top two finishers, the only ones who advance under California’s current system, could both be Republicans. That outcome wouldn’t reflect the actual preferences of California voters; it would simply be a result of the votes being overly divided. With Choice Voting, that scenario couldn’t happen. Voters could support their preferred Democrat without fear, knowing that if that candidate couldn’t win, their vote would transfer rather than be wasted.

‍

Choice Voting is not a new or experimental idea. More than sixty jurisdictions across the United States already use voting systems that work in ways similar to Choice Voting. Cities such as Portland, Oregon, Albany, California, Cambridge, Massachusetts, have adopted systems that allow voters to rank candidates and help ensure that more voices are represented in government. Larger cities including San Francisco and New York City also use ranked ballots in their elections. Across the country, dozens of other cities and states are actively exploring similar reforms. Because these systems tend to produce more representative outcomes and encourage broader participation, many election scholars and democracy experts view this approach as a gold standard for modern democratic elections.

‍

Peter Holmes:

Choice Voting would be implemented through an amendment to the San Diego City charter. What are the key changes in the charter amendment, and how are you working to get the proposed charter amendment on the ballot?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:

The charter amendment makes three key changes to how San Diego runs elections. The first is that all San Diego city elections for office would use Choice Voting. That means voters rank candidates in order of preference instead of just picking one.

‍

Second, primaries go away entirely. They cost the city millions of dollars to run, most voters don’t even show up for them, and they give incumbents an unfair advantage over challengers. Getting rid of them opens the door to actual competition.

‍

Third, the City Council would grow from nine members to fifteen. The nine district seats stay exactly as they are — your neighborhood still has a representative focused on local concerns. But we’d add six new citywide seats. Those get filled in a citywide election where voters rank candidates, and all six are elected at the same time.

‍

What’s powerful about those citywide seats is that they let different groups of voters across San Diego elect someone who actually shares their priorities. Under Choice Voting, you keep the strong neighborhood representation from the district seats, but now the council as a whole can also reflect a much broader range of voices from across the city.

‍

We’re placing the Choice Voting charter amendment on the San Diego ballot in 2028 through a citizens’ petition, and that requires us to gather tens of thousands of signatures. That’s a big undertaking, but we’re absolutely up to the challenge. Thousands of San Diegans have already signed up to be notified when the petition becomes available, and organizations throughout San Diego have signed on as official supporters.

‍

We encourage anyone who believes in this reform to go to our website and sign up today. When the petition becomes available, we’ll reach out so people can sign it.

‍

We’re asking people to sign up now so that when that petition window opens, we’re ready to hit the ground running, because we won’t have much time to get every signature we need.

‍

Peter Holmes:

One of the benefits of Choice Voting is that it can make government more representative of the communities it serves. How could this system change who has a seat at the table in San Diego?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:

Right now, each City Council district elects just one representative. So if your candidate comes in second, you essentially have no one at the table, even if a large number of people in that district shared your concerns and priorities. That’s a lot of residents with no real say in how the city is run.

‍

Choice Voting changes that dynamic. Because citywide councilmembers are elected at the same time under Choice Voting, different groups of voters across the city help elect candidates who share their perspectives and priorities.

‍

That leads to a council that reflects a broader range of viewpoints about how the city should move forward. Instead of the same candidates and interests winning every race, more ideas and approaches can be represented.

‍

When more perspectives are present at the table, discussions become more thoughtful and solutions more effective. The goal is to create a city council that more accurately reflects the range of experiences and ideas that exist across San Diego.

‍

Peter Holmes:

Whenever people hear about changing the voting system, some worry it will be confusing or complicated. What do you say to residents who are curious but skeptical about this kind of reform?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:

It is completely reasonable for people to have questions about any proposed reform. The good news is that ranked ballots are actually very intuitive. Voters simply rank candidates in the order they prefer them.

‍

Many cities and states across the country already use ranked ballots in some form. Once people try it, most find it straightforward and actually prefer it to the old way of voting.

‍

What matters most is that the system gives voters more choice rather than less. It allows people to express their preferences more fully and ensures that more votes help shape the final outcome.

‍

When people understand that the goal is to make elections more representative and more responsive to voters, most see why reforming the system is essential.

‍

Peter Holmes:
If San Diego adopted Choice Voting, how would local democracy change?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:
San Diegans will feel far more connected to their local government. Residents will have greater access to their elected officials and more opportunities to participate in decisions that affect their neighborhoods and daily lives.

‍

Elections will become more constructive and more focused on ideas. Because candidates benefit from earning support from a broader range of voters, campaigns will emphasize engaging communities and discussing solutions rather than attacking opponents.

‍

The City Council will reflect a wider range of perspectives, experiences, and policy ideas from across San Diego. When more viewpoints are represented at the table, discussions become more thoughtful and decisions more effective.
‍

A healthier democracy begins with a system that invites people into the process rather than leaving them on the sidelines.

‍

Peter Holmes:
How can people learn more about Choice Voting or supporting this effort?

‍

Andrea St. Julian:
If you want to learn more about Choice Voting, visit TheJusticeWorkshop.org. The website has information and resources that give more detail about how Choice Voting works and why it matters for San Diego. You can also read the entire proposed charter amendment online.

‍

If you’re ready to get involved, signing up on the website is the most important first step. That way we can notify you when the official petition becomes available. In order to place this reform on the ballot, we’ll need a substantial number of San Diegans to sign the official petition when it’s released. Building a large list of supporters ahead of time helps us quickly reach people who are ready to sign and helps ensure that we gather the signatures required to qualify the measure for the ballot.

‍

People can also volunteer to help educate others about Choice Voting and spread the word about the effort.

‍

Donations are also helpful in supporting the work required to bring structural reforms like this to the voters. Donations can be made at  https://secure.actblue.com/donate/the-justice-workshop-2.

‍

Ultimately, this is about what every San Diegan deserves: a government that actually reflects who they are and responds to what they need. That’s what Choice Voting makes possible.

‍

‍

‍

‍