The November election was the first time 16- and 17-year-olds were able to vote for local school board races in two Alameda County local educational agencies.
At a Dec. 6 session at CSBA’s Annual Education Conference and Trade Show, representatives from Berkeley and Oakland unified school districts spoke on how they enacted youth voting and the results of their efforts.
Years of student-led advocacy took place before ballots were able to be cast in 2024.
“We didn’t go and have adults teach kids, kids went and taught kids about what they were voting for and why it’s important to vote,” said Oakland USD student trustee Maximus Simmons. Although adults may think it’s in the best interest of students to make decisions for them, Simmons said it is important for young people to have the opportunity to make choices for themselves, especially while they are still in supportive learning environments.
Presenters pointed out that 16- and 17-year-olds have the cognitive and practical capacities to vote and a solid understanding of the issues facing schools. They also have fewer barriers to registering compared to their freshly legal peers who are often preoccupied with college plans and/or securing employment. Additionally, the ability to vote can improve civic knowledge and engagement early on.
Background
Measure Y1, approved by more than 70 percent of Berkeley voters in 2016, and Measure QQ, approved by more than two-thirds of Oakland voters in 2020, allowed their respective city councils to lower the voting age to 16 for “otherwise eligible” voters for school board elections subject to certain conditions.
Even with public support, it took time and coordination with the Alameda County Registrar of Voters to implement.
As explained at the session, the county registrar of voters was open to implementing youth voting but it wasn’t a top priority and there were significant technical issues, like the ability to add young voters into local election management software without disrupting the connection to the state system, associated with the project. There was a desire to get the work done right and concern about potential additional costs.
Persistent advocacy eventually got the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to direct the registrar of voters to implement youth voting and helped secure the additional staffing needed to do so.
Oakland USD hired two retired voting registrars to act as technical experts and work with the registrar’s office, compiling a document of technical requirements that established a framework for youth voting and helped troubleshoot new challenges as they arose.
The Berkeley and Oakland districts, the City of Oakland and the registrar of voters entered an agreement to share costs, such as upfront design expenses and ongoing expenses like printing youth vote documents and training.
There were also legal considerations, including the implication of Lacy v. San Francisco, which resolved outstanding legal questions.
Outcome
After the registrar announced in August 2024 that youth voting was a go for November, local jurisdictions and organizations met regularly to register as many youth voters as possible, according to presenters. They surpassed their goal of at least 1,000 youth with more than 1,550 students registered between the districts. Nearly 600 participated in the election.
The movement to encourage more young people to become civically engaged continues to gain momentum.
During the November election, the City of Albany, also located in Alameda County, passed Measure V to allow youth voting not just in school board elections, but in all city elections as well as city and school district ballot measures.
