.
I have described my transformation from a passive Anaheim resident, to one actively learning about the problems of the city, in previous essays in this blog. The riots of the July 24th and the images of Anaheim looking like a place in Iraq, when the police were deployed as a militarized force, made me look for explanations. Riots had recently occurred before the July 24th, in other places of the world. In a Paris suburb, minority youth had battled with the police. In my native earthquake-prone country, businesses were looted after the last powerful earthquake. People who feel marginalized sometimes react in desperate violent ways during crisis.
The August 8 council meeting at Anaheim High School, at the aftermath of the riots, woke me up to the city politics. The majority of the council members blocked the reforms overwhelmingly requested by the people attending the meeting. These council members embodied the political, social and economic power in the city. I attended most of the council candidates ‘debates, got to know the main issues and the people running for office. There was a wide agreement about the pressing issues, such as the resort area being a major source of revenue and employment, but corporate subsidies were questioned. Crime and gangs were another concern. Some proposed a comprehensive intervention approach, emphasizing social programs; others proposed an increased repressive police response.
The former mayor Pringle, who had become a lobbyist to the local tourist industry, is alleged to have substantial influence on the city council that approved subsidies to the resort industry and Disney. He was demonized by some of his critics, and apparently rightly so. He endorsed and funded the candidate openly identified with supporting subsidies to hotel developers. Disney financed this candidate campaign, attacking the main opponent advocating transparency and fair deals for the city.
In this council election, I did not vote along party lines, or based on ethnicity or gender. Now that I know about the local issues and the players, I knew the difference between the Pringle/Disney candidate Brandman, and the other candidates. I knew who almost singlehandedly run on the fear of crime, ex-cops Lodge and Linder. I got to know those who represented the average residents and proposed sensible solutions: Leos, Roberts and to a certain extent, Mr Chuchua. I did not get warmed up or impressed by Ms Kring, I barely got to know the almost invisible candidates Gaona and Rivera.
The election results are disappointing, but they must be taken in the context of the transformation of the city politics.
| CITY OF ANAHEIM Member, City Council |
| Number To Vote For: 2 |
| Completed Precincts: 165 of 165 |
| Vote Count | Percentage | |
| LUCILLE KRING |
20,126 |
19.4% |
| JORDAN BRANDMAN |
19,933 |
19.2% |
| JOHN LEOS |
14,412 |
13.9% |
| STEVEN ALBERT CHAVEZ LODGE |
10,863 |
10.5% |
| LINDA LINDER |
10,296 |
9.9% |
| JENNIFER RIVERA |
9,961 |
9.6% |
| BRIAN NEIL CHUCHUA |
7,331 |
7.1% |
| RODOLFO “RUDY” GAONA |
5,686 |
5.5% |
| DUANE ROBERTS |
5,090 |
4.9% |
Self-identified “conservatives” got at least 60% of the vote (Kring, Leos, Lodge, Linder, Chuchua). The candidates with Latino-sounding names, with unknown political identification, Gaona and Rivera, got 15.1% . Adding Leos 13.9, the Latino candidates got 29% of the vote. Roberts, the lonely progressive running for the first time got a significant 4.9. The Pringle/Disney candidate Brandman got 19%.
Anaheim is still a conservative city. Republicans got 60.8%, and Democrats 19.2% of the vote. The candidates who based their campaigns on fear of crime got an impressive 20.4%. The 15.1% of the two low-key Latino candidates shows that ethnicity alone, probably devoid of information about the issues, is a significant factor.
I am puzzled about the role of the Disney corporation in this election.The stakes must be very high for Disney. Taking over the failed subsidized Garden-Walk hotel projects, and having the subsidized street cars/Artic project, must be vital stocks in their business empire. The influence of former major Pringle is also amazing. Rather than being demonized, the question is to understand how he rose to this level of power, to avoid future similar occurrences. Did anybody in the council, or in the community, notice his ambition when he was the mayor?
To unify the city, the causes of the riots must be addressed. The under-representation and inadequate services provided to significant sections of the community are some of the causes. Replacing the current system at large of electing the council members, which favors the most affluent sections of the city, is an important step to heal our city.
“Anaheim is still a conservative city. Republicans got 60.8%, and Democrats 19.2% of the vote.”
As I read this part of your blog, for some reason, the thought of Anaheim Hills vs. the rest of Anaheim came to mind. Probably not true.
*Mayor Tait…..seems to be applying a professional approach to the various issues at hand. Lucille and Jordan, will in our opinion, support the right answers and provide a solid effort to do the right thing..for all.
I am hopeful the council will move forward and address the issues that effect residents and stop any future giveaways of our revenue.
I don’t think Leos would consider himself “conservative”.
His union has spent well over $600,000 the last two city elections and I would say that amount allow shows that he has little in common with the average city resident. He may went to all the events that matter and received the Mayor’s endorsement but I think this ever increasing amount of union money will be an issue to the voters. I can see the campaign maliers in two years citing “over a million dollars spent on Leos’s campaign the last 6 years and voters need to know …Why?”
Brandman will be first a tool for Pringle but will be sympathetic to unions and then to the residents. Latinos residents concerns will not be high on his list because he doesn’t acknowledge that Latinos don’t have problems with government. (i.e. police abuse)
Interesting that with Brandman’s union endorsements, especially form the OC Labor Federation, that sealed Leos fate. These guys don’t think this stuff out.
I will say that Lucille understands the problems with Pringle and the unions and while not reportedly agreeing with ward elections would have an open mind to listening to all residents.
According to Wikipedia,since the 1950s conservatism in the United States has been chiefly associated with the Republican Party. I believe that Leos is a registered Republican. He has become a victim of the ostracism within the GOP, due to his union background and connections. In the next election cycle republicans may have a different position on the role of the unions, as part of their rethinking to avoid losing more elections
I don’t expect major changes in the way how the council will proceed. Brandman thinks that Pringle is a good man, and chances are that he will follow his advise very closely. I hope that Ms Kring will be able to bridge the differences between the two camps, and listen to all residents, especially the ones that feel disefranchised. According to Eric Carpenter, OC Register, she favors four districts. Mayor Tait had proposed six districts. The December council meeting should provide some insights on the depth of the reforms.
To help your ‘transformation’ and for anyone else interested, I want to share the data below that I just pulled from the OC Voter Registrar site, (population from geometrx.com – it was FREE!)
ocvote.com –>Results –>Detailed Data & Reports –>Election Mapping System THEN type in a Zip Code and it will list All precints in that Zip.
ocvote.com –> Results –> Detailed Data & Reports –> Results By District Then click on Run 13 for a PDF display of the Statement of Votes (Uncertified yet) ‘Official’ Precinct by Precint Record. Anaheim City Council Race is Pages 395-397 of 923. I used the precinct by zip list and a calculator for the table here-
A B C D E=D/C F=D/B
ZipCode Population # Registered (%) #Ballots Cast (%) Turnout %Represented
92801 6206822199 35.76 10062 45.33 16.21
92802 42709 16640 38.96 8847 53.17 20.71
“FLAT
92804 85914 30225 35.18 14538 48.1 16.92
LANDS”
92805 70401 25036 35.56 12432 49.66 17.66
92806 37173 16531 44.47 8960 54.2 24.10
—————————————————————————————————————————————
92807 36171 24878 68.78 16440 68.08 45.45
“HILLS”
92808 20039 12815 63.95 8445 65.9 42.14
Population may be dated, but C and D are fresh from last weeks vote. Notice there is NO column for campaign Money spent, ethnicity, etc As it should pop out immediately the differences due solely to registration and turnout! Since both of these are up to the INDIVIDUAL VOTER, and BTW More people now vote by MAIL at their convenience than walk into the polls (look it up while you browse the oc vote site!), I don’t think I will be ready ANY TIME SOON to GIVE UP 3 of my Council Votes to HOPE that ‘Better Representation’ will magically result for ME or anyone else. Yes I oppose Districting, but I would ALSO urge Districting SUPPORTERS to review the ‘Expert Panel’ testimony from the July 11,2012 special Coucil Meeting , and learn about OTHER ALTERNATIVES (Such as cumulative voting) that would improve representation ANd BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE SUIT PLAINTIFFS, without losing your vote.
I am continuing to explore the Precinct data in greater depth (since the big Money Players and both sides in the suit are not about to share theirs anytime soon!) because I feel that the people of Anaheim should have some solid basis on which to judge any change in election procedure, not just grab the first ‘shiny object’ that is offerred. If you are interested or want to help, visit http://www.handsoffourvotingrights.com or email to handsoffourvotingrights@yahoo.com – thanks!
I get your point about eventually losing 75% of your individual vote, but in the current circumstances, the system at large perpetuates the under-representation and its negative effects are reflected to a large extent in the riots. Crime and police behavior, at the local/city level, can substantially be managed at this level. The managers are the people in the city council and departments. Latinos would have better chances of being elected and represented under a district system, and hopefully better addresss the needs of our community.
I also get your point about voters registration and turnout. I walked a predominantly latino precint for a couple of days before the election, getting out the vote. There was hardly any candidates signs in the lawns or apartments windows, in comparison with other more mixed neighborhoods. The level of participation seems to be much lower than what the demographics indicate.
Thanks for providing information that I will take into account to better understand the issues of our city. In the meantime, I think that the lawsuit by Los Amigos organization is a compelling one. Latinos have been under-represented under the currrent system at large. The merits of the lawsuit have been discussed here http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2012/07/eye-rolling-at-gustavo-arellanos-especially-embarrassing-anti-aclu-rant/.
@#$%& that touch plate mouse! Anyway Both registration and turnout are about 60% in the ‘Hills’ vs mid 30’s and 50% in the ‘Flat lands’. When you multiply those together, THAT gives a ‘representation’ advantage that is in the VOTERS OWN HANDS.