.
.
.
The District Voting wave has hit the shores of Costa Mesa. In addition to the OC cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Garden Grove all falling into District Voting lines , you can now add Costa Mesa jumping into those waters.
In response to a letter from the Rubin Law firm threatening possible litigation for violations of the CA Voters Rights Act, the City has put on the agenda a plan for moving forward with District Voting. At the next City Council meeting Tuesday April 19th, on the agenda is a PLAN FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN CREATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FOR DISTRICT ELECTIONS. Naturally the devil will be in the details. But…..
This is a huge pendulum swing for a City that, just a decade ago,was the first in the nation to authorize its local police to enforce federal immigration law. Ever since Allan Mansoor ran for City Council in 2005, on the Anti-Cucaracha Truck Train, Latinos in the City have suffered under a yoke of “otherness”. The City’s “MinuteMan” Mayor Mansoor held fundraisers featuring anti-immigrant Sheriff Joe Arapio , and canoodled with and embraced racists like Jim Gilchrist and the late Barbara Coe.
The City of Costa Mesa was under a banner of institutionalized racism , and the Latino community has suffered greatly for it. Specific racial profiling from the local police has a way of making a vibrant segment of a community hunker down. Has the City’s intolerant views towards a 34% segment of the population created a climate of voter intimidation…….? Certain experienced Law experts and Voting rights activists sure think so.
So what’s next? By law, a minimum of three public meetings must be held, but as of right now,…….we haven’t even voted on moving ahead with this plan, and we won’t even know if we will, until after the Council vote on the 19th. Then we have to have the community meetings (3 minimum) and the maps drawn out. Which took Anaheim about a year. All of this needs to be considered in creating districts: (1) topography; (2) geography; (3) cohesiveness, continuity, integrity, and compactness of territory; and (4) community of interest of the districts. All of this has to be accomplished by August 12th to meet the Nov. Ballot deadline.
So currently, at the time of this posting, the tentative agreement is to move rapidly forward with the District Plan. The Council majority could opt to ignore the agreement and face litigation under the CVRA. Other options. such as, increasing the number of districts and voting for a Mayor at large currently are not included in the current agreement between the law firm and the City. The majority of residents don’t even know that this is coming down the tracks. It will be interesting moving forward with the tight timelines given and the difficult voting demographics the City has spread out. How will a three person solid voting council cabal view this change? Could rock their cozy boat a bit. Many unanswered questions remain. And….
There is the already insanely crowded Costa Mesa Ballot in a General Election to consider….just look at it!
- Smart Growth Initiative
- Council Backed Development Initiative to confuse Voters
- $34 million dollar Library/Community Center Bond ( to replace an existing Library and Community Center)
- $20 million dollar (“Put up or Shut up”) Righeimer blank check affordable housing bond
- Marijuana Initiative 1
- Marijuana Initiative 2
- Monahan’s Marijuana Initiative 3 ?
- Possible Fairview Park Preservation Measure (collecting signatures still)
- Three Open Council Seats
- District Voting w/ maps
……..and that’s just for the City.
There is a saying played during every single Council meeting that “There’s always something happening in Costa Mesa”…..and Boy! they aren’t kidding.
How about district voting in Santa Ana?
Why don’t you help get it started, Logan?
Santa Ana has District voting except that its fake district voting.
Yes, we wrote all about it in “Sirloin vs Dog Food”
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/06/sirloin-or-dog-food-council-prepares-to-foist-santa-ana-style-faux-districting-on-anaheim-tonight/
One of the Anaheim Council Majority’s many ways to prevent real districting (while putting it off for two years and wasting $2 million fighting it just so they could enjoy the status quo a little longer) was to at one point offer Santa Ana-style districting as a compromise.
There was and is a huge ongoing gravy train in Anaheim, that MAY come to an end when council candidates don’t need such huge amounts of money to run, and are closer to their constituents.
The majority that’s been running Costa Mesa for a while is more closely aligned with the OC GOP, and prioritizes screwing over public workers, privatization, outsourcing and endless development. And during the last two elections they hung on to their majority by like, less than a hundred votes each time if I remember correctly.
Has the Righeimer-Mensinger-Monahan majority not tried to stymie this? Do they not feel threatened by it the way Murray-Eastman-Sidhu-Kring did? Or are you guys just keeping them too busy to fight off everything?
115 votes for Monahan…..only 47 votes for Righeimer. Very slim majority but they act like they have a mandate from GOD.
I believe strongly in districting but not the kind thats in Santa Ana where they basically get to chose a stooge for the elite interests that get voted on by the citizens at large. They need to vote on locals from the district by that district only. Otherwise theres just no point.
I think some cities need it more than others. Anaheim cried out for it most, with its huge unwieldy geography, extremes of wealth disparity, and racial diversity.
Huntington Beach rejected districts about 15 years ago. I forget the details, but at the time it was pretty obviously a Scott Baugh scheme to get more Republicans in, and they didn’t get enough signatures.
As I’ve said before, I think that there’s a strong case that Santa Ana needs “by-districts.” But someone there would have to call for it — probably someone from either the Viet community or even possibly the white community. (I’d certainly prefer the former.)
Well basically at present the KleptoCrats just pick a stooge out of each district and then promote them to the at large voters. Not even close to real representation if you ask me.
We are well aware of the circumstances of SA’s Ward elections Lucas – and why that needs to change to real district elections.
Find a plaintiff, Goat Boy. Until then it’s just noise.
*Yoah Dude, are you picking on Newport Beach again? That’s not nice.
No, I wasn’t reading you properly….probably just doing some “mental editing” as we read along. OK, remember dear friend – There are no At-Large Districts, unless you are simply voting for a Mayor….that is the only way we know of that there can be an At-Large seat.
Good piece, by the way, Ger!
But: not “Rubin Law Firm” — Shenkman and Hughes, right?
Nope. Robert Rubin.
Really? The story you linked to said otherwise. Weird.
30 years fighting with the Lawyers Committee of San Francisco.
Yeah, I know him from Anaheim’s fight. Good guy. I just can’t figure out why the Pilot would get it wrong. Maybe they’re local counsel. (But not very local, if so.)
*There will be a legal challenge if Costa Mesa doesn’t develop district representation. Only our prognosis…..of course!