A rent control activist held up a sign depicting a guillotine that read, “Your term ends when we say so” at a Santa Barbara City Hall meeting on July 28.
During public comment at the Santa Barbara City Council meeting on July 28, resident Ana Garcia held up a sign depicting a guillotine that read, “Your term ends when we say so.”
Garcia advocated for strong tenant protections and program enforcement, and said, “Our working-class neighbors who make Santa Barbara what it is deserve to have their basic needs met.”
Garcia continued, “Especially over greedy businesses who are referred to as landlords or housing providers here, who seek to profit from exploiting us.”
The sign appeared during a contentious rent stabilization hearing that stretched past four hours.
The rent stabilization ordinance—the most polarizing issue to hit Santa Barbara City Hall in decades—inched forward Tuesday night over the course of a four-hour-plus-meeting, and the City Council pored over 127 policy details of the proposed ordinance.
The city had received more than 650 written comments from the public over the past month.
Critics immediately condemned the sign’s violent imagery.
Mayor Randy Rowse said he “100 percent” condemns the sign.
“That kind of directed violent imagery tests the boundaries of free speech,” he said. “I assume the elephants on the picture indicate Republicans and perhaps it was directed at me. Too bad I’ve never been a Republican.”
Council member Meagan Harmon was equally direct.
“It’s an easy ‘unacceptable,'” she texted.
Eric Friedman, who is running for mayor, also rejected the sign’s message.
“It’s not acceptable to me,” said Friedman, acknowledging the First Amendment argument. “In a time when elected officials have faced threats, violence and even been killed, everyone should take time to think about the potential ramifications of their actions.”
The most striking omission came from Kristen Sneddon, the council member and mayoral front-runner whose rent control support had energized tenant advocates.
Sneddon was silent even though her support for rent control largely fuels her campaign for mayor. Over the course of an afternoon and evening, she didn’t respond to repeated texts and calls seeking response to a simple, binary question—does she condemn the sign, or does she find it acceptable?
Only after criticism mounted did Sneddon respond.
“We all support the First Amendment and welcome public comment at City Hall, from all sides, on any issue,” Sneddon wrote. “There are times when comments or images are used to provoke, and this one clearly did.”
She stopped short of calling the sign unacceptable.
Sneddon’s response echoed the comments about not thinking the sign affected council votes. Her statement avoided the direct moral judgment that her fellow council members had offered.
Garcia, meanwhile, defended the sign as symbolic rather than threatening.
Garcia posted this comment: “So the ‘violence’ of my SIGN is more important to report on as political violence than the ACTUAL violence these elected officials condone against the people every day?” She added, “Don’t be distracted by this. The sign has a ballot box as part of the guillotine, but that just gets ignored as well, right?”
In further written remarks to a local news outlet, Garcia doubled down on that framing.
“It’s symbolism,” she said of her sign. “As for violence, I think choosing to side with people who are exploiting tenants and who make poor choices in their business endeavors, over helping to ensure constituents stay housed, is violent.”
Her argument framed the sign as a comment on voting, not beheading.
The sign’s design featured both a guillotine blade and a ballot box integrated together, with the elephant and donkey symbols representing the two political parties flanking the weapon. The exact relationship between these elements became a flashpoint in the debate over the sign’s meaning—whether it depicted a violent threat or a voting mechanism.
In the viral moment that sparked the controversy, Santa Barbara tenant activists and rent control advocates descended on City Hall on Tuesday, July 28 for a contentious hearing on whether the city should adopt a permanent rent stabilization ordinance. The debate had already grown heated, with supporters and opponents of the measure packed into council chambers. When it came time for public comment, Garcia rose with her sign, standing before the dais to voice her position on the proposed rules. The display stunned observers watching from the gallery and those monitoring the proceedings on the city’s livestream, which broadcast the moment to the wider community.
The City Council met on Tuesday, July 28, to receive report summaries on the public comments received during the 30-Day Public Comment period on the June 10 Public Review Drafts of the Residential Rent Stabilization Ordinance and Just Cause Ellis Act Amendments Ordinance.
The council’s next scheduled action on the ordinance will be in January.