As we watched the twists and turns of Los Angeles’ three-way mayoral primary – including reality television star Spencer Pratt’s eyebrow-raising disappearing lead – I can’t help but think about our own three-candidate race here in Rancho Santa Fe.
Thankfully, our circumstances are considerably less dramatic. Los Angeles is wrestling with homelessness, crime, housing affordability and a general sense that the city is one viral video away from a nervous breakdown. Rancho Santa Fe, by comparison, spends much of its time debating amenities, horse trails, stucco color and whether a building that is plainly three stories tall should be counted as two stories with a creative interpretation of “courtyard”
But after several years of watching Association politics up close, I’ve come to believe that our elections aren’t really about projects at all. They’re about character.
What We Protect and What We Permit
Every candidate promises to preserve Rancho Santa Fe. Every candidate says they support the Protective Covenant (PC). Nobody campaigns on cutting down more trees, lot splits, selling open space, ignoring member priorities or spending money on things residents never asked for. The real test comes after Election Day, when friendships, loyalties and personal preferences collide with the responsibility of representing an entire community.
The Association’s 2022 member survey was remarkably clear about what residents value: safety, open space, a vibrant village, rural character, and preserving the qualities that make Rancho Santa Fe unique. Those aren’t short-term priorities. They’re the result of people playing the long game – thinking not about the next project, but about what Rancho Santa Fe should look like ten, twenty or fifty years from now.
Yet over the years I’ve watched enormous amounts of time, energy and money directed toward projects and priorities that never seemed to rank particularly high with members, while some of the things residents consistently say they care about most often struggle to find champions.
Maybe that’s because there is very little accountability once directors are elected. There is no ombudsman. There is no independent referee. If members disagree strongly enough with the direction of the Association, their options are largely limited to voting or hiring lawyers.
Which brings us back to Monday.
For me, this election isn’t about Silvergate, Gateway, the clubhouse restaurant, Osuna Ranch or any other single controversy. It’s about whether the next Board will put the interests of the entire community ahead of politics and personal agendas. Rancho Santa Fe doesn’t need directors looking for ways around the PC. It needs directors who understand the assignment: preserve the Ranch’s character and protect every member’s investment.
Because stewardship is not ownership. The Ranch belongs to all of us. The Board’s job is simply to leave it better than they found it. The real question isn’t who can win an election. It’s who can be trusted to think beyond one.
Editor’s Note: Ballots are due by 5 p.m., Monday, June 15, at the RSFA offices.