Who Killed Measure D? Anaheim Hills Voters Provided the ENTIRE MARGIN

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Take away Anaheim Hills, and as of today Measure D on reducing the term of the Mayor goes to a recount.  Within Anaheim Hills, it was a slaughter.  And that is probably good news for Tom Tait — the only prospective Mayoral candidate who took a strong and public stand against it — and bad news for his neighbor in the Hills, Kris Murray, who is a major component of the Pringle Machine that promoted Measure D.  In doing so, Measure D has become a proxy for the battle between the two factions, the latter of whom are currently (if ludicrously) putting forward Flatlander and maybe Flat-Earther Lucille Kring as their champion.  (I leave Lorri Galloway out of this analysis because she didn’t insert herself into the fight, which is not likely to endear her to her neighbors.)

This suggests that the high-voting Hills have already made up their mind about how they feel about Tait’s leadership — and they agreed on the desirability of longer term.  Voters in the Flatlands were split down the middle.

City of Anaheim (16.9%)        12801     6383         9100      10762         10967     9149
39th Cong. Dist. (19.0%)          1008        479            633          921                869       710
45th Cong. Dist. (21.0%)          3082     1469          1738        3016            2298     2542
46th Cong. Dist. (15.6%)           8711     4435          6729       6825            7800     5897
29th Sen. Distr.  (15.7%)           6139     3218          4843        4814            5595     4166
34th Sen. Distr.  (14.5%)          1903        870            1411        1429            1627     1248
37th Sen. Distr.  (20.1%)          4759     2295           2846       4519            3745     3735
65th Asm. Dist.   (16.5%)          4559     2408          3665      3522            4188     3077
68th Asm. Dist.   (20.1%)          4759     2295          2846       4519            3745     3735
69th Asm. Dist.    (14.1%)         3483     1680          2589        2721            3034     2337
3rd Sup’v Distr.   (20.2%)         4753     2294          2843       4515            3739     3734
4th Sup’v Distr.   (15.4%)          8048     4089          6257      6247            7228      5415

In case it’s not obvious how to read this chart: to the left are the various districts in Anaheim (with the City totals themselves in the first row.)  After that are three sets of two columns of numbers: first for Measure C, then for Measure D, then for Measure E.  As you can probably tell, the vote on Measure D is in boldface orange.  You can see, for example, in the second row, that the 39th Congressional District (Royce’s) voted 1008 to 479 in favor of Measure C; in the third row, the 45th Congressional District (Campbell’s) voted 1738 for and 3016 against Measure D; and in the fourth row the 46th Congressional District (Sanchez’s) voted 7800 to 5897 in favor of Measure E.

You’ll also notice that many of the districts are exactly the same.  The Anaheim portions of the 37th State Senate District (Walters) and the 68th Assembly District (Wagner) are identical — and they are almost identical to the Anaheim portion of the 3rd Supervisorial District (Spitzer.)  By dividing the City up in different ways — and the Statement of Voters (of which I’m using the latest one, not the final one) divides people up into many many different districts beyond these.

I think that we can get the clearest sense of who falls where by looking at the three Assembly Districts.  AD 65 (Quirk-Silva) is mostly south of the 5; AD-68 (Wagner) is mostly east of the 55; AD-69 (Daly) is the area in between them.

We see that in AD 65, in western and southern Anaheim, voters favored Measure D by a total of 3665 to 3522.  In AD 69, northern and central Anaheim, voters opposed Measure D by a total of 2589 to 2721.  Add these together, and the total for the flatlands, ADs 65 and 69 combined, is 6254 to 6243DEEPLY into recount territory!

However, voters in Anaheim Hills opposed Measure D by a margin of 2846 to 4519.  Boom!  It’s over! (They were also split evenly on Measure E (the fireworks) — literally 3745 to 3735!  Now you know why that mailer reassuring them that the Hills would be excluded from Measure E went out!)

Who’s the thought leader of Anaheim Hills?  Pretty clearly, it’s not Curt Pringle and Kris Murray, but Tom Tait.  Voters can be fooled, as the were with Measure C — but when they know what’s going on they are not with the Kleptocrats.  And convincing the Flatlands that they aren’t with the Kleptocrats either will be easy and fun!

Tait smiling

Artist’s conception of Tait once he sees the breakdown of votes by district.  Note, by the way, that this post contains actual data, making it very different from the unsupported assertions you will get on Anaheim Chamber of Commerce sites!

About Greg Diamond

Somewhat verbose worker's rights and government accountability attorney, residing in northwest Brea. General Counsel of CATER, the Coalition of Anaheim Taxpayers for Economic Responsibility, a non-partisan group of people sick of local corruption. Deposed as Northern Vice Chair of DPOC in April 2014 when his anti-corruption and pro-consumer work in Anaheim infuriated the Building Trades and Teamsters in spring 2014, who then worked with the lawless and power-mad DPOC Chair to eliminate his internal oversight. Occasionally runs for office to challenge some nasty incumbent who would otherwise run unopposed. (Someday he might pick a fight with the intent to win rather than just dent someone. You'll know it when you see it.) He got 45% of the vote against Bob Huff for State Senate in 2012 and in 2014 became the first attorney to challenge OCDA Tony Rackauckas since 2002. None of his pre-putsch writings ever spoke for the Democratic Party at the local, county, state, national, or galactic level, nor do they now. A family member co-owns a business offering campaign treasurer services to Democratic candidates and the odd independent. He is very proud of her. He doesn't directly profit from her work and it doesn't affect his coverage. (He does not always favor her clients, though she might hesitate to take one that he truly hated.) He does advise some local campaigns informally and (so far) without compensation. (If that last bit changes, he will declare the interest.)