A referendum petition challenging the City Council's State Street Master Plan recently collected over 8,000 signatures and has been submitted to the city clerk. The effort, backed by the State Street Business Alliance, seeks to put the council’s decision before the city’s voters, arguing it is a significant demonstration of public interest in the momentous policy question.
The State Street Business Alliance formed earlier this year to address concerns from business owners and residents who felt ignored during the council's consideration of the downtown corridor's future. The council's plan, approved with a 6-1 vote, is estimated to cost nearly $100 million and would completely alter the historic main street. Despite repeated appeals for cooperative compromise from the Alliance, including approximately 1,000 petition signatures and hundreds of comments presented to City Hall, the council proceeded with its plan, leading to the current referendum effort.
Opponents of the referendum have reportedly attacked the petition process itself, but proponents describe these criticisms as misinformed and misguided. The right of referendum, which allows citizens to challenge actions of their elected representatives, has been part of the California Constitution since 1911. Professional signature gathering is presented as a legitimate aspect of California’s democratic process, with people routinely compensated for this work. Proponents argue that the residence of petition gatherers does not invalidate the opinions of eligible Santa Barbara voters who sign the petition. Furthermore, they state that the referendum language was available for people to read before signing, and while gatherers have an obligation to represent it accurately, anecdotal allegations of misleading voters should not discredit thousands of legitimate signatures or an entire movement.
It is crucial to distinguish this effort from another separate referendum. There are currently two distinct referendum campaigns involving City Council decisions. The one concerning the State Street Master Plan is backed by the State Street Business Alliance. The other, regarding the city’s recently adopted rent "stabilization" ordinance, is backed by the Santa Barbara Rental Property Association. Although signature gathering for these separate issues may have overlapped, they concern entirely different matters, and accurate reporting should make this distinction clear, according to proponents of the State Street referendum.
The referendum campaign is attributed directly to the City Council’s refusal to listen to business owners who expressed concerns about declining sales, vacancies, and the difficulty of surviving downtown. These business owners reportedly pleaded for a practical solution that could restore controlled vehicle access while allowing outdoor dining, pedestrians, bicycles, and community events to coexist. The State Street Business Alliance emphasizes that this effort was not initiated for a political battle, but out of care for Santa Barbara, its downtown, and the businesses invested there.
Proponents of the Master Plan often cite opinion surveys of self-selected respondents. However, those advocating for the referendum assert that a survey is not an election, and a City Council vote is not a citywide vote. They argue that while supporters of keeping State Street closed have every right to that opinion, those who believe it should reopen deserve the same consideration. The purpose of a referendum is to provide voters with a lawful opportunity to reconsider decisions made by their elected representatives, characterizing it as "democracy in action." Proponents believe downtown deserves a thoughtful, economically responsible solution that benefits businesses, residents, and visitors. They question why opponents of the referendum are fighting against allowing the people of Santa Barbara to decide, especially if, as opponents claim, the overwhelming majority supports the current plan. The call is for voters to decide, stating it is the fairest way to settle the debate.