Update — 4:12 p.m. Wednesday, June 10: With 99% of votes counted, Erickson led with 62,077 votes and 20.5%. Goldsmith was in second at 18.3% with 55,413 votes. Marshall was in third at 17.5% with 53,072 votes — trailing Goldsmith by 2,341 votes with roughly 1% of ballots remaining. The Associated Press has called Erickson’s spot in the November runoff. WEHOonline is also calling Goldsmith as the second runoff candidate. The gap between Goldsmith and Marshall cannot be closed with the ballots that remain. The race will be certified July 10.
Update — 4:51 p.m. Tuesday, June 9: John Erickson and Brian Goldsmith are headed to a November runoff in the race for California State Senate District 24. Tuesday was the final day for mail ballots postmarked by June 2 to arrive at the Registrar’s office. With AP reporting 98% of the estimated vote counted, Erickson led with 61,807 votes and 20.49%. Goldsmith was in second at 18.31% with 55,232 votes. Marshall was in third at 17.53% with 52,882 votes — trailing Goldsmith by 2,350 votes. There are not enough ballots left for that to change. WEHOonline is calling this race: Erickson and Goldsmith advance to November.
Earlier Erickson was trailing by more than 3,000 votes. A lot of people wrote him off — including us — partly because the Associated Press erroneously reported 89% of ballots had been counted when the actual figure was far lower. He kept gaining. Marshall, who led from election night through Thursday, ran out of ballots.
Erickson and Goldsmith meet in November. General election is November 3. The race will not be certified until July 10.
Update — 4:48 p.m. Monday, June 8: Erickson extended his lead in Monday’s ballot release. Erickson led with 58,588 votes and 20.27%. Goldsmith remained in second at 18.44% with 53,321 votes. Marshall fell further back in third at 17.63% with 50,970 votes — now trailing Goldsmith by 2,351 votes. For the fourth consecutive day, Marshall gained the fewest votes of the three leading candidates. We’ll wait for the AP to officially call it, but it looks like Erickson and Goldsmith are headed to November.
Update — 4:55 p.m. Sunday, June 7: Erickson held his lead in Sunday’s ballot release and extended it. With counting still ongoing, Erickson led with 51,797 votes and 19.58%. Goldsmith remained in second at 18.64% with 49,304 votes. Marshall continued to fade, dropping further back in third at 18.02% with 47,676 votes — now trailing Goldsmith by 1,628 votes and Erickson by more than 2,100.
Erickson picked up 4,566 votes in Sunday’s count. Goldsmith gained 2,897. Marshall gained 1,982. Friday, Saturday, Sunday. Same story every day. Democratic ballots come in, Erickson gains the most, Marshall gains the least.
The West Hollywood councilmember who appeared to be trailing badly earlier this week — after the Associated Press erroneously reported 89% of ballots had been counted when the actual figure was far lower — has now led this race for two straight days. WEHOonline updated its coverage as the numbers changed. Erickson and Goldsmith to November. That’s where this is going. Marshall needs something to change in the remaining ballots. Three days in a row says it won’t.
Counting continues through June 9. The race will not be certified until July 10.
Update — 4:38 p.m. Saturday, June, 6: John Erickson is now leading the SD-24 race.
The West Hollywood City Councilmember who trailed by more than 3,000 votes earlier this week surged into first place in Saturday’s ballot release, passing both Brian Goldsmith and G. Rick Marshall. Erickson led with 47,231 votes and 19.03%. Goldsmith was in second at 18.69% with 46,407 votes. Marshall, who led the field since election night, fell to third at 18.41% with 45,694 votes — now trailing Goldsmith by just 713 votes.
Erickson picked up 4,895 votes in Saturday’s count. Goldsmith gained 3,094. Marshall gained 2,311. The Democratic ballots keep coming and they keep breaking the same way.
The Republican who stunned this district four days ago is now on the outside looking in. The all-Democratic November matchup that most observers originally expected — before election night scrambled everything — is back on track.
Erickson told supporters Thursday evening the race was too close to call. He was right. What he didn’t say — and maybe didn’t know — was that he was about to lead it.
Goldsmith, who expressed confidence earlier this week that he would advance to the runoff, is in second place. Marshall’s path back into the top two requires the remaining ballots to break sharply Republican. Nothing in the count so far suggests that will happen.
The race will not be certified until July 10. Counting continues through June 9.
WEHOonline will update results as new counts are released.
Update — 4:50 p.m. Friday, June, 5: The race for California State Senate District 24 is on. What looked like one race Friday morning was flipped on its head by Friday afternoon. It turned into a genuine thriller when the latest ballot count showed West Hollywood City Councilmember John Erickson closing to within 977 votes of second-place Brian Goldsmith. All three leading candidates are now separated by just over 1,000 votes.
With 71% of the estimated vote counted as of 4:59 p.m. Friday, Republican G. Rick Marshall barely led with 43,383 votes and 18.8%. Beverly Hills Democrat Brian Goldsmith was in second with 43,313 votes and 18.8% — just 70 votes separating him from Marshall. Erickson was in third with 42,336 votes and 18.4%, having closed more than 2,200 votes on Goldsmith in a single day’s count. Republican Kristina Irwin was in fourth at 15.0% with 34,559 votes.
Erickson picked up 6,585 votes Friday. That’s more than double what he gained the day before. Goldsmith added 4,329. Marshall added far less. The ballots coming in now are from the Westside and urban precincts — Erickson’s turf — and it shows.
There are about 29% of the ballots still uncounted. This race now has three plausible outcomes.
The race for California State Senate District 24 turned into a genuine thriller Friday afternoon when the latest ballot count showed West Hollywood City Councilmember John Erickson closing to within 977 votes of second-place Brian Goldsmith. All three leading candidates are now separated by just over 1,000 votes.
After trailing for days, Erickson told his supporters the race was too close to call in an IG video Thursday evening. Friday’s vote dump suggest he was right.
Goldsmith also posted a video expressing confidence he would advance to the runoff. Friday’s numbers did nothing to undermine that confidence — if anything, the surge in Democratic ballots strengthens his position. It is Marshall, not Goldsmith, whose place in the top two is now possibly in jeopardy.
Marshall has led the field since election night — a result that surprised many in a district that has trended heavily Democratic for years. But his margin is now razor thin.
Next vote drop will be Sunday between 4-5p. WEHOonline will update results as new counts are released.
Vote totals sourced from the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder official election results at results.lavote.gov. Results are unofficial and uncertified pending final canvass. Certification is expected July 10, 2026.
So November is going to be an expensive bloodbath, at least as far as the 24th Senate District is concerned. Will Erickson have coattails that help Chelsea Byers and the other friends he will endorse or will his record come back to haunt all of them. With a closely divided district, it is difficult to venture any predictions.
Steve, let’s see if the Feds put a stop to ballot harvesting by unions. Unite Here Local 11 has been heavily involved in West Hollywood politics. Saying nothing more.
I find working people reps to be far less offensive than people who support the business-friendly establishment Dems that support billionaires and plutocrats.
Happy to say more.
I hope you mean closely divided between corporate Dems and union-supported Dems, because otherwise, please explain.
Let’s be real. Erickson is more popular than ever.
Not true. He can’t help but expose his own self-serving incompetence. He’s not a legitimate candidate He is just not qualified for any public office. Vote Goldsmith.
It’s amazing how all these mail in ballots propels a candidate that no one really knows outside of West Hollywood (and he’s own city doesn’t even really like him) and places him in first position days after the election…same with the LA City mayor race. We really need to look into the way things are done and bring back election day…and only in certain exceptions should someone be able to use mail in ballots. And they should be RECEIVED by election day..none of this “if postmarked by” crap. And we really need to look into whether or not homeless individuals… Read more »
It’s ok, now Steve Hilton is on the Governor’s ballot, Republicans will actually vote and will clearly vote for Goldsmith. Republicans don’t vote unless there’s one on the top ballot and now there is.
You surely have Trump’s & conspiracy minded Republicans’ talking points down fairly well.
“Bring election day back?” That’s also funny.
John is known far and wide, which you would know if you read anything about him.
I like John.
Homeless people have a right to vote, and many have a place to pick up their mail.
What is the matter with you?
Primaries usually have low turnouts but they he general is where we will see larger numbers donate and while I am a Republican with no party since 1990 and gave up after Davis was impeached for the wrong reasons (Enron) and Arnold was a disaster- no sane tax payer can support people like Erickson who made many mistakes as a council member, maybe not to the degree as Prang who cost us tax payers money and will never rise beyond his safe office, but Goldsmith has a much better shot in the general. He has little to no baggage and… Read more »
Mother always advised me not to count my chickens before they’re hatched. There’s a big difference between getting 4% of eligible voters in a 20% turnout in the primary (20% of 20% is 4%), and facing a general election with higher turnout in what will likely be a one-party general election. Erickson will likely continue his image makeover to appeal to more moderate voters throughout the district. Many have receipts to counter that manipulation (lie). It’s going to be a fun couple of months.
Seems to me the people who don’t pay attention could be swayed by a Hillary or Pelosi endorsement.
Many people here are a little difficult to figure out, but when you trash UniteHere it seems to me you’re more pro-business than pro-worker, so either a Republican or an Establishment Dem.
John is the most progressive candidate and WeHo is a supposedly “progressive” city. You may not like him, but he’s an effective legislator, as is Lindsay Horvath.
I have never seen so many positive comments about Mr Erickson, so it’s a change from the usual trashing.
This website is the WeHo version of the California Post. Where’s the SPENCER PRATT endorsement?
Jesse — you’ve had more runway here than most trolls get. We welcome all viewpoints and all voters. What we don’t welcome is reflexive trolling posing as critical thought. I know this will prolly melt ur brain, but for the record: I and most of our readership are proud Democrats and Independents. Not leftist loons or MAGA goons. We also have readers who are proud Republicans — we welcome all. Too bad for you that you can’t tolerate anyone who breaks the binary you need to function. But I digress. You’ve had chances to engage intelligently. You keep choosing not… Read more »
Thank you, Brian!
Yes, thank you.
Finally!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Love it!!
Brian-
I have been told by multiple people I am an exceptionally patient person. Your patience with ‘Kimberleigh’s’ (Jesse’s) trolling comments exceeded mine!
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
It seems pretty clear that the perception among some readers here that John Erickson is deeply unpopular in West Hollywood doesn’t really match the election results. The numbers speak for themselves. He still appears to have strong support from a lot of residents. While there are certainly people who oppose him and regularly speak out at City Council meetings, they seem to represent a much smaller segment of the community than some would suggest.
sadly the vast majority of weho residents don’t pay any real attention to local politics and certainly have never been to a council meeting. so elections end up being heavily influenced by marketing and who has the strongest corporate and institutional backing. anybody who has been to a council meeting would see a different picture entirely.
West Hollywood isn’t the only city in district 24. If I were a gambler I’d bet most of his votes came from the residents in the other cities that don’t know him as well as the citizens in WeHo do.
Good point, Izzy. That low-information reality is exactly why candidates like Chelsea Buyers and other progressives are likely to do well this November. With such a crowded field, the few moderate candidates will probably split their support and get cancelled out.
Once again find myself agreeing with you, Izzy!
I love this website so much because it offers deep insight into the minds of people living in such a strangely small bubble in West Hollywood. Just because no one you talk to likes John Erickson (or Lindsey Horvath or Chelsea Beyers or whoever) doesn’t mean they’re “hugely unpopular.” Even if everyone who shows up at city meetings shows up to scream at them, it doesn’t mean they’re “hugely unpopular.” Just because you like Lauren Meister and she doesn’t like them doesn’t mean they’re “hugely unpopular.” If they keep winning competitive elections,THEY’RE POPULAR. Maybe it’s time to consider that you… Read more »
Maybe they are popular because of the money from their special interest groups such as Unite Here which has pushed their chosen candidates through We show up because we don’t believe special interest groups deserve a stronger voice than actual residents. Winning doesn’t mean the best candidate was chosen to represent us. It is a shame that elections are bought rather than earned. If JE was such a great candidate I would ask why no mention of West Hollywood and the need to transform his appearance to sway voters.
Yes.
Unite Here is a labor union representing employees in one of the city’s largest industries. Working-class people who work in West Hollywood need protection, even if some of them don’t get to vote in the elections. Dismissing this as “special interest” like it’s big tobacco or something is frankly ghoulish.
Where have you been, Ethan?
: D
The residents of WeHo also need protection against the developers destroying our neighborhoods and enabled by Erickson and the merry band of politicians using WeHo as a stepping stone to higher office and means building a base of campaign contributors at the expense of those living here.
Special interest groups? Do you mean the crypto billionaires who spent millions of dollars against Erickson in the State Senate election? Those groups outspent Erickson but Erickson still got first place.
If you’re anti special interests, how come I haven’t seen you comment in opposition to the crypto billionaires? Or is it only not okay when hotel workers pool together resources but it’s okay when billionaires do?
I don’t believe in any special interest group that uses their coffers to sway how candidates are voted in. I vote with seeing how a politician acts and listens to residents. Clearly you turn a blind eye to how John Erickson has represented himself at council meetings and treats people with differing views. His campaign never mentioned West Hollywood and his outer appearance was tamed to sway votes. Dishonesty to gain power is not something I will ever promote. As for crypto billionaires running ads against John, I applaud them for asking and letting voters know he serves himself under… Read more »
John Erickson listens to residents. Just last week, more residents in West Hollywood voted for John Erickson than Brian Goldsmith. In 2024, more residents voted for John Erickson than George Nickle. Those people who voted for Erickson are residents too. I have seen comments saying Erickson voters were “bussed in” from other cities by “unite here”. That’s 100% false, there’s zero evidence that’s been brought forth to back that up other than “I don’t know anyone in Weho who voted for John Erickson” (that’s not evidence). If you want “resident voices” to be represented, why are the ~4k Nickle voters… Read more »
1/3 of people is not a large number; If we had ranked choice voting, he’d be out; 60%+ of WEHO didn’t vote for Erickson….case closed
It’s amazing what those mail in ballots can do for a crappy candidate. Election reform NOW.
It’s not “mail-in ballots”.
It’s a slightly-engaged electorate.
Hammer them with incessant mailings and they begin to believe them.
This is horrible news for California. Saddens me on how many people vote with a blind eye.
I’ll say the good news is most republicans will vote for Goldsmith to join the current Goldsmith voters.
Yes absolutely will. Personally think we should kick him out of California.
I’d vote for Goldsmith over Erickson any day…and I’m center right.
if he ends up winning in the final election, what does it mean for his West Hollywood Council seat?
It means he must resign.
If he wins, he’ll resign from city council and we’ll have a special election to fill his seat.