When I decided to run for the Culver City City Council, I knew that I would eventually have to persuade thousands of residents to vote for me. What surprised me was learning that before voters could even consider me, I first had to obtain signatures from registered Culver City voters just to have my name placed on the ballot.
Under California law, a candidate for municipal office in a city with at least 1,000 registered voters must submit nomination papers containing no fewer than 20 and no more than 30 voter signatures.
This is not a special rule created by Culver City. It comes from California Elections Code Section 10220. Culver City’s responsibility is to collect the nomination papers and verify that enough of the signatures are valid.
On the surface, twenty signatures does not sound like very many. Nevertheless, the requirement raises an interesting democratic question:
Should someone need the permission of twenty other voters before being allowed to run for public office?
What Does Signing a Nomination Paper Mean?
A nomination signature does not necessarily mean that the signer supports the candidate or intends to vote for that person.
It simply means that the voter believes the candidate should be allowed to appear on the ballot and present their ideas to the community.
That distinction is important. A voter might sign my nomination paper and eventually vote for someone else. The signature gives me access to the election; it does not obligate the signer to endorse me.
However, this distinction may not always be clear to voters. Some people may believe that signing a nomination paper is the same as publicly supporting the candidate. That misunderstanding can make people reluctant to sign, especially in a small community where political relationships can become personal.
Why Does This Requirement Exist?
The apparent purpose is to demonstrate that a candidate has at least a minimal connection to the community.
Without any requirement, practically anyone who meets the basic legal qualifications could request a place on the ballot. In a large election, this could potentially produce an extremely long list of candidates, including people who are not seriously interested in serving.
The twenty-signature rule acts as a small screening mechanism. It requires a potential candidate to speak with local voters and find at least a handful who are willing to let that person enter the race.
In election-law terms, this demonstrates a minimal amount of community support. It does not prove that the person is qualified, knowledgeable, or likely to win. It merely shows that the candidacy is real enough for twenty registered voters to nominate the person.
The Advantages of the Requirement
It discourages completely frivolous candidacies
Running an election costs money. Candidate names must be verified, ballots must be prepared, voter guides must be printed, and election records must be maintained.
Requiring twenty signatures may discourage someone from entering the race as a joke, publicity stunt, or momentary impulse.
If a person is unwilling or unable to speak with twenty local voters, the argument is that the person may not be prepared for the much greater responsibility of campaigning throughout the city.
It requires candidates to make contact with voters
Politics can become isolated. Candidates may spend most of their time speaking with consultants, political organizations, donors, clubs, and other insiders.
The nomination process requires candidates to begin with actual voters.
Even this limited contact can be educational. A candidate quickly learns that some residents are enthusiastic, some are skeptical, some are unfamiliar with the election, and others are reluctant to sign anything connected to politics.
It confirms that the candidate has a local presence
The signatures must come from properly registered Culver City voters. This provides a basic check that the candidate is seeking a real municipal office with at least some awareness among residents of the city.
The number is relatively low
California could have required hundreds or thousands of signatures. Instead, the minimum is twenty.
For most serious candidates, twenty valid signatures should be achievable. The requirement is therefore less restrictive than signature requirements based on a percentage of the city’s entire electorate.
The Disadvantages of the Requirement
Voters—not just the government—become gatekeepers
A person who satisfies the legal qualifications for office still cannot appear on the ballot without obtaining signatures from other people.
That means twenty voters effectively become the first gatekeepers in the election process. The rest of the electorate cannot consider the candidate unless this preliminary requirement is completed successfully.
In a democracy, there is a reasonable argument that registered candidates should be allowed to present themselves directly to all voters. The election itself should determine whether the candidate has support.
It can favor politically connected candidates
An established candidate may already have access to political clubs, neighborhood organizations, donors, former officeholders, and volunteers. Obtaining thirty signatures might take that person less than an hour.
A first-time candidate without political connections may have a very different experience. The person may need to approach strangers, explain the nomination form, answer questions, and overcome concerns that signing constitutes an endorsement.
Twenty signatures may be a small number, but the burden is not necessarily equal for everyone.
Validity rules create uncertainty
A candidate does not merely need twenty handwritten names. The candidate needs twenty signatures that election officials determine are valid.
A signature might not count if the person is not registered in Culver City, provides an address that does not match the voter-registration record, leaves out required information, or is otherwise ineligible to sign that nomination paper.
For this reason, candidates are normally encouraged to obtain all thirty signatures permitted by law. The extra ten provide protection in case some signatures are rejected.
But the candidate is not allowed to submit more than thirty. That creates an unusual situation: California establishes both a minimum and a maximum. A candidate needs twenty valid signatures but is given room for only ten possible mistakes.
The filing period can make the burden harder
Nomination papers must be obtained, circulated, signed, and returned during a legally established filing period. Candidates cannot simply collect signatures whenever they want.
Someone with a flexible schedule, a campaign team, or strong political connections has an advantage. Someone who works full time, cares for a family member, has a disability, or has only a few available days may experience the same requirement as a much greater obstacle.
Twenty is not based on Culver City’s present population
The same 20-to-30-signature range applies to every California city with at least 1,000 registered voters unless a valid charter provision provides otherwise.
That means a city with slightly more than 1,000 voters and a city with hundreds of thousands of voters can be subject to the same numerical requirement.
I found no evidence that twenty was selected because it represents a meaningful percentage of Culver City’s population. It appears to be a standardized number established by the state Legislature, not the result of a Culver City study.
Is Twenty the Right Number?
Twenty is not an outrageous requirement. It is low enough that an independent candidate can realistically qualify without having a large organization or a significant amount of money.
At the same time, we should not pretend that the number has some special democratic meaning. Twenty signatures do not establish that someone would be a good councilmember. They do not prove broad community support. They do not protect voters from dishonest, uninformed, or unprepared candidates.
They simply show that twenty registered voters were willing to nominate the person.
If the purpose is only to prevent frivolous candidacies, twenty may be reasonable. But the process should be transparent and easy to understand. Voters should be clearly told that signing a nomination paper does not require them to vote for or endorse the candidate.
Candidates should also receive a clear explanation of why signatures may be rejected. The government should not treat nomination paperwork like a test in which the rules are discovered only after a mistake has been made.
My Conclusion
After investigating this issue, I found no evidence that Culver City independently decided that a candidate must obtain twenty signatures. The City is administering a requirement established by California law.
The strongest argument in favor of the rule is that a person asking to govern the city should be able to persuade at least twenty local voters to let that person enter the race.
The strongest argument against it is that ballot access should not depend on a candidate’s social connections, available time, or ability to convince other people to sign an official-looking government document.
My experience also taught me something about the strange world of politics: you begin asking voters for support before you are officially allowed to become their candidate.
Twenty signatures may be a small obstacle, but it represents a much larger question. Who should decide which voices are allowed onto the ballot—the government, a small group of nominators, or the voters on Election Day?
That is a question worth asking, even when the required number is only twenty.
0 Comments
Comments are reviewed before they appear.