In September 1872, Col. Robert S. Baker purchased the San Vicente and
Santa Monica ranchos from Jose del Carmen Sepulveda and other landowners. The
purchase included a total of 38,409 acres of land for a reported $54,000. Col.
Baker was a wealthy businessman who married Arcadia Bandini de Stearns. She was
the widow of Don Abel Stearns, one of the earliest American settlers of
Southern California, and the daughter of Juan Bandini, one of the wealthiest and
most distinguished of the early Californians, according to Ingersoll’s Century
History – California, 1542-1908.
Sometime in 1874, Senator John P. Jones purchased an
interest in the San Vicente ranch and, in partnership with Colonel Baker,
began laying out the townsite of Santa Monica. Senator Jones was a member of the
State Legislature of California from 1863 to 1868, and a U.S. Senator
representing Nevada from 1873 to 1903. (Ingersoll’s Century History –
California, 1542-1908.)
July 15, 1875. The Honorable Tom Fitch, announcing the auction
of the first lots in Santa Monica:
At one o’clock we will sell at public outcry to the highest
bidder, the Pacific Ocean, draped with a western sky of scarlet and gold; we
will sell a bay filled with white-winged ships; we will sell a southern horizon,
rimmed with a choice collection of purple mountains, carved in castles and
turrets and domes; we will sell a frostless, bracing, warm, yet languid air,
braided in and out with sunshine and odored with the breath of flowers. The
purchaser of this job lot of climate and scenery will be presented with a deed
of land 50 by 150 feet. The title to the land will be guaranteed by the owner.
The title to the ocean and the sunset, the hills and the clouds, the breath of
the life-giving ozone and the song of birds is guaranteed by the beneficent God
who bestowed them in all their beauty. (Looking at Santa Monica, James W.
Lunsford, 1983)
|
11/30/1886 |
A Special Election was held to decide the incorporation
of the Town of Santa Monica . |
|
12/06/1886 |
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors met on this
date to canvass the votes cast at the November 30, 1886, election for the
incorporation of the City. The votes cast were 96 in favor and 71 opposed! At
the same election, a board of five trustees was elected to administer Santa
Monica.
The first City Seal was adopted December 22, 1886, by Ordinance No. 4, and is
described as follows: “Around the margin of said seal the words ‘Town of Santa
Monica Incorporated November 30, 1886,’ vignette, wharf ship in the distance,
bathers in the surf.” The Town of Santa Monica was situated within the Township
of La Ballona. |
| |
FIRST CHARTER: MAYOR-COUNCIL ELECTED EXECUTIVE FORM OF
GOVERNMENT |
| 10/17/1905 |
The Board of Trustees called for a special election to
be held on this date to decide whether to elect 15 freeholders to frame a
municipal charter. The measure was approved. |
| 03/28/1906 |
On this date, an election was held wherein the proposed
charter framed by the freeholders was approved. The Charter was ratified by the
Legislature on January 15, 1907. Under the new charter, the City Council was
composed of one Mayor with veto power, and one Councilmember from each of its
seven wards. The charter required weekly meetings. Councilmembers received $5
per meeting, which were set not to exceed one per week. |
| |
SECOND CHARTER: COMMISSION FORM OF GOVERNMENT |
| 12/01/1914 |
A Special Election was called for this date as a result
of qualified petition submitted by voters for a charter amendment to change the
form of govern-ment. The charter amendment was approved. City Government now
consisted of 3 departments: Public Safety, Public Works and Finance with one
elected Commissioner responsible for each department. The City Council consisted
of the three elected Commissioners. The City Councilmembers had $3,000, annual
salaries. The Commissioner of the Department of Public Safety was the ex-officio
Mayor; and the elections process included the use of a preferential ballot
form. |
| 12/07/1915 |
Municipal Election to elect the three Commissioners, as
provided for under the new charter form of government. Three Commissioners were
elected. The Commissioner of Public Safety was also the ex-officio Mayor and
Chairman of the Board. This form of Government continued for many
years. |
| |
CURRENT CHARTER: COUNCIL-MANAGER FORM OF
GOVERNMENT |
| 10/00/1945 |
The City Council voluntarily placed the question of
election 15 freeholders to frame a new charter on the upcoming December
municipal election in response to a petition that was being circulated and had
already gotten about 7,000 signatures. The petition sought to place the same
question on the ballot. |
WHY WAS CHARTER REFORM NEEDED?
(The following information was gathered from a number of articles
appearing in different editions of the Evening Outlook in 1945.)
In 1944, the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce began a study of the
problems confronting the City. Some time later, after a series of forum
meetings, the Chamber arrived at the conclusion that a council-manager form of
government was what was needed in Santa Monica. At that point, the
recommendation was turned over to a city-wide Citizens Charter Committee,
chaired by Charles Ashford. Mr. Ashford was quoted in an Evening Outlook article
as follows:
For years Santa Monica has been handicapped by a system of
divided authority in its city government and by other bad effects of a charter
adopted when this city had less than 12,000 population. Today the need for a new
charter has become apparent to the great majority of our citizens. If Santa
Monica is to grow and prosper in the postwar era, it must have a
progressive-minded and efficient city government which it cannot have under the
present charter. The movement for charter reform is nonpartisan and
nonpolitical. It is not directed against present office holders, who under the
present form of government are poorly paid to have too restricted an opportunity
to serve the city. Under a new charter they might find a much larger field for
real public service.
In the summer of 1945, the Citizens Charter Committee began
circulating a petition to place on the upcoming municipal election in December
the question of electing 15 freeholders to frame a new charter for the City, and
to elect the 15 freeholders at the same election. In October of the same year,
when the petition gatherers had secured about 7,000 signatures, apparently
influenced by the popularity of the petition and, perhaps not wanting to incur
the costs of a special election if the petition did not meet the December
election deadline, the City Council voluntarily placed the question of electing
the freeholders on the December ballot.
Articles published in the Evening Outlook in the weeks prior to
the election set forth the various problems surrounding the then existing
three-commissioner form of government, as follows:
-
“It divides authority among three men and makes none responsible
for what happens outside their respective departments.
-
“All three are equal in authority, and if a disagreement arises
about a course of action, the matter is usually dropped. They rarely agree on
any question of broad policy outside their own departments or overall policy
looking to the future. This form of government prevents any of them from being
responsible for the whole government and from considering city administration as
a whole.
-
“Specific examples: the botched breakwater project, where a great
deal of money was wasted; failure to provide recreation facilities in the City;
and lack of civic improvements of any importance.
-
“The government, operating without any over-all business head or
policy, has brought the city finances into a deplorable condition over a long
term of years. In spite of stiff taxes, the city services cannot be maintained
even at the present level but for the profits earned by the Municipal Bus Lines.
If revenues from the bus lines were to decline in the future, the city would
probably have to raise taxes.” (The Evening Outlook added that the then current
combined tax rate for Santa Monica was higher than that of any other city in Los
Angeles County.)
-
“The Commissioner of Public Safety, ex-officio Mayor, is
responsible for the Police and Fire Departments, and the airport and lifeguard
service: This Commissioner gets a salary of only $250 per month, the same as the
other two commissioners. He is not allowed to engage in any (other) business or
profession. And because he controls the Police Department and is responsible for
law enforcement, he is exposed to great temptation. If the Commissioner yields
to the temptation, there is no one in city government to do anything about it or
to hold him accountable for his actions. The result is a demoralized police
force – something that no community could afford.”
| 12/04/45 |
General Election held; the creation of a Board of
Freeholders to draft a new Charter passed and 15 Freeholders were elected; Bond
measure for sewage treatment plant passed; increase of Commissioner salary from
$3,000 to $6,000 annually failed; and exchange of lands with UCLA Regents
failed.
The total vote on whether to elect a Board of Freeholders was 8,733, with
7,150 “yes” votes and 1,583 “no” votes. |
| 11/05/46 |
Special Election held for ratification of new Charter
providing a Council-Manager form or government, with seven Councilmembers
elected at-large, as proposed by the Board of Freeholders. The new Charter was
adopted. |
| 03/18/47 |
General Election for the selection of the first seven
Councilmembers under the new charter: Mark T. Gates, H. George Markworth, George
A. Neilson, Ben A. Barnard, Jack J. Guercio, J. Lee Schimmer, Jr., and Edwin
Talmadge were elected. The Council elected Mark T. Gates as Mayor/Chairman, and
J. Lee Schimmer, Jr., as Mayor Pro Tempore. City Engineer Maurice King was
appointed Acting City Manager. |
The Council-Manager form of government established in the 1947
Charter has served Santa Monica well for more than 50 years. Nearly half of the
cities in the U.S. with populations of 2500 or more operate under the
Council-Manager form of government with an elected governing body and a manager
hired by that body to carry out the policies it establishes.