A paid political advertisement for Gabe Escobedo tells voters, “Vote on or before June 2!” But Escobedo is running for Santa Barbara City Council in the November 3 election. Is it simply a printing mistake—or does it raise a larger question about paying attention to details before decisions are made?
Sometimes one little detail raises a lot of questions.
Take a look at a paid political advertisement for Gabe Escobedo appearing on the Santa Barbara Independent.
It reads:
“Vote Gabe Escobedo for City Council.”
Then:
“Representing YOU.”
And immediately underneath:
“Vote on or before June 2!”
At the bottom it says:
“Paid For By: Gabe Escobedo for City Council 2026.”
There is an obvious problem.
Today is October 5. Ballots are being mailed, and the Santa Barbara City Council District 6 election in which Escobedo is running is November 3, 2026.
So why does a paid City Council campaign advertisement tell voters to vote on or before June 2?
Was June 2 Left Over From Another Campaign?
Escobedo previously ran for California State Assembly District 37. He announced that campaign in January 2022, before then-Santa Barbara County Supervisor Gregg Hart entered the race. Escobedo suspended his Assembly campaign in March 2022.
But that doesn’t explain this advertisement.
California’s 2022 primary election was June 7, not June 2.
June 2 was California’s primary election date in 2026. But Escobedo wasn’t running for Assembly this year.
And his current advertisement doesn’t say Assembly.
It says:
“Gabe Escobedo for City Council 2026.”
So where did June 2 come from?
Was it simply a typographical error?
Was an old template used?
Who designed the advertisement?
Who proofread it?
Who approved the final copy?
Did anyone notice the election date before the advertisement was published?
There may be a perfectly innocent explanation.
But shouldn’t voters be able to ask?
Details Matter at City Hall
Maybe getting an election date wrong on an advertisement seems insignificant.
But isn’t attention to detail exactly what we should expect from people asking to serve on the Santa Barbara City Council?
Councilmembers are responsible for reviewing budgets, staff reports, contracts, labor agreements, development projects, fee increases, and multimillion-dollar expenditures.
A date matters.
A decimal point matters.
A funding source matters.
And a sentence buried on page 100 of a staff report can matter just as much as the headline on page one.
Santa Barbara’s recent budget problems demonstrate why.
During June’s difficult budget deliberations, Councilmember Kristen Sneddon said she was surprised by how contingency reserves had been used in previous years to help balance the budget. Councilmember Eric Friedman responded that he, Mayor Randy Rowse and Councilmember Mike Jordan had voted against the previous year’s budget because they were concerned about exactly that problem. Santa Barbara News-Press
Sneddon subsequently clarified that she knew reserves were declining and said her surprise concerned the failure to follow previous Council direction to replenish $2 million in reserves. Noozhawk
Either way, isn’t there an important lesson here?
Shouldn’t council members know exactly what they are voting for before they vote?
No More “Surprises”
Santa Barbara ultimately adopted an approximately $730 million FY2027 all-funds budget on June 30.
City Administrator Kelly McAdoo acknowledged that reserves had been depleted over the years and said continued fiscal discipline would be necessary both to balance future budgets and replenish those reserves. City of Santa Barbara
So shouldn’t we be asking every candidate:
When you vote for a budget, will you know whether ongoing expenditures exceed ongoing revenues?
When you approve employee contracts, will you calculate their costs beyond the first year?
When you approve a new program, will you ask what it will cost five years from now?
When staff recommends spending money from reserves, will you know what will be left afterward?
And when something doesn’t add up, will you ask questions before casting your vote?
Those questions are particularly relevant because Escobedo isn’t running as someone new to public decision-making.
He currently serves on the Santa Barbara Unified School District Board. He previously served on Santa Barbara’s Planning Commission and Community Formation Commission. Santa Barbara News-Press
His campaign says Santa Barbara residents deserve a City Hall that is responsible with their tax dollars. Gabe Escobedo for City Council
Good.
Then shouldn’t voters examine the record?
What About the City’s Deficit?
At a recent District 6 forum, candidates were specifically asked about Santa Barbara’s depleted reserves.
Escobedo proposed offering retirement incentives and determining whether some vacant City positions actually need to be filled.
He also proposed forgiving or suspending first-year license fees for Downtown businesses. Santa Barbara News-Press
That creates another set of questions.
Why Downtown businesses only?
If eliminating a City fee helps a new business on State Street survive, why wouldn’t the same reasoning apply to a small business opening on Milpas Street, De la Vina or Upper State?
How much revenue would the City lose?
Which fees would be waived?
For how long?
And with Santa Barbara trying to replenish depleted reserves, where would that lost revenue be replaced?
Again, those aren’t accusations.
They’re budget questions.
And shouldn’t we want councilmembers who ask budget questions before voting?
What About His School Board Record?
There is another record worth examining.
Escobedo currently serves on a school board that has faced significant deficits, reductions and layoffs.
At that same September forum, reporting noted that Escobedo previously voted to issue preliminary layoff notices to 85 teachers. Santa Barbara News-Press
That doesn’t mean one board member caused the school district’s financial problems. Declining enrollment, expiring one-time funding, compensation increases, and other expenses all contributed.
But Escobedo has cast votes involving public money.
So what budgets did he approve?
What employee compensation increases did he approve?
What were the district’s reserves when he joined the board?
What are they now?
And when did the board first know reductions would become necessary?
Those are questions we will continue examining from the actual board records.
Back to June 2
Which brings us back to that little advertisement.
Perhaps “June 2” is nothing more than a mistake.
Mistakes happen.
But City Council decisions can involve tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, and correcting those mistakes isn’t as easy as correcting an advertisement.
So before November 3, perhaps voters should ask something larger than why the wrong election date appeared:
Who checks the details?
Who asks questions when the numbers don’t add up?
Who reads beyond the executive summary?
Who asks where the money will come from before voting to spend it?
And most importantly:
Can Santa Barbara afford another councilmember who is surprised after the decision has already been made?
Maybe the June 2 date has a simple explanation.
Let’s hear it.
Because whether we’re talking about an election date, a City budget, or millions of dollars in public spending, shouldn’t Santa Barbara expect its elected representatives to get the important details right before they act?
That seems like a question worth asking before November 3.
•••
DYK extras:
#1- Barry Liker, since no gifts were allowed at your party—and you’ve been asking me for months to start writing again—I can’t think of a better 90th birthday gift than to dedicate my return to “Did You Know?...”, to you. Happy 90th Birthday, my friend!
#2- Did you buy your tickets for SPOTLIGHT tonight at the Lobero? Find your discount code below:
As Greg Lukianoff, the CEO of FIRE—who will be speaking at the Lobero this Thursday, October 8—noted when the rankings were released: “The overall state of free speech on campus is grim.” This is an understatement. Despite giving rise to the free-speech movement in the 1960s, UC Berkeley now gets an “F” from FIRE
for its lack of commitment to free expression. Sadly, it is hardly alone. Of the 27 California colleges ranked by FIRE, only two received passing grades.
18 other schools, in addition to UC Berkley, received Fs
Santa Barbara is lucky—for the very first time—to have FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff
at the Lobero (Yes, it is air-conditioned!) tonight at 7pm—Free Speech Under Fire: Greg Lukianoff on the New Age of Censorship: Greg Lukianoff - Spotlight SB - Lobero Theatre. Greg’s topics will be ripped from today’s headlines because, as we are all aware, there is no shortage of free-speech issues to discuss.
This will be interactive with much audience participation so, YES, we want our supporters to come which is why I want to remind you of the discount promo code we provided very early on: SPEECH. Tickets start at just $34, but we really do want our Spotlight Supporters to add to the discussion so please take advantage of the discount and attend.
Greg Lukianoff - Spotlight SB - Lobero Theatre
Community Calendar:
It's good to see you writing again! Yes, details matter immensely.
Attending one of the all-district candidate debates, Gabe Escobedo was far and away the least impressive of the entire group. Inarticulate, uncomfortable and an eager yes-man for everything proposed by the current radical and partisan majority.
Nothing thoughtful about the major city controversies passed through his brain. State Street, rent-control, city budget shortfalls - zero consideration about any their long-term negative impacts; just keep moving forward with all of them. That is how Gabe Escobedo intends to represent YOU. Just keep slogging into The Big Democrat Muddy.
It would be a disaster to add him to the dysfunctional city council majority that has already been inflicted upon us today: Sneddon, Santamaria, Gutierrrez, Harmon. So naturally, Escobedo carries the full-throated endorsements by city unions and the local Democrat party machine.
Pay attention, downtown District 6 - Escobedo will cement the current rapid downfall of this city if he is elected. Pay attention Districts 4 and 5 and mayor - the wrong choices in all the city districts and mayor's race can make things so much worse, so very worse.
Do the math, voters - four radical city council members creates a city council majority. Two of them are already in place: Santamaria and Gutierrez. Which two new radical city voices do you want to add that ensure another four years of the city's current downfall?
This is crunch time, voters. Do not keep turning our city over to Democrat party politics.