Republican Lynn Daucher is STILL ahead in the battle for the 34th State Senate District, per the OC Voter Registrar’s website. Daucher is leading Democrat Lou Correa by 553 votes. I think she will ultimately win – and that is bad news for Santa Ana Councilman Carlos Bustamante, who is now stuck on a deadlocked city council. And the Claudia Alvarez faction may pick up Ward 1 in a Special Election that the police and fire unions figure to stay out of. Even worse for Carlos, his seat in Santa Ana’s Ward 3 is up in two years. Let’s see how quickly he sticks his finger in the air and ends up siding with Alvarez. That would be a smart move, but I have come to expect the opposite from him…
Alvarez is the clear winner in Santa Ana, as the head of a team that includes council newcomers Michele Martinez and Sal Tinajero. She ought to be our next Mayor Pro Tem as well. Now is the time for her to rally the troops and take on Santa Ana City Manager Dave Ream. His contract comes up in March, and like Rummy, he must go! Let’s send him packing to his mansion in Coto de Caza. It is time for a fresh start in Santa Ana.
We also need to focus on Ward 1. I agree with Martinez – it would be great to get behind a qualified woman for this ward. Hey Tish – would you mind moving to Ward 1? Whatever happens, this seat must not go to another Pulido hack.
And let’s not forget the SAUSD school board. My sources tell me that Cecilia Aguinaga wants Tinajero’s seat – but lets consider all comers and do what is best for our kids. I like Aguinaga, but it bothers me that her children are enrolled in a private school – something I found out towards the end of the election cycle. Our next board member should be a proud supporter of PUBLIC schools. We also need to work to rid the board of Rob Richardson and Rosie Avila. We brought change to our City Council – now let’s do the same to our school board.
I would also like to see a new ad hoc organziation come together in Santa Ana to support the need for change. How about calling it the “Santa Ana Reform Commission?” Let’s work together and make sure that Pulido and Ream get an earful. Martinez has posted her objectives on this blog, and I am in FULL agreement. The youth should come first and I can think of no better way to do this than to start building libraries again. I know the City Council will never appoint me to the Library Board, or any other commission, but I have resolved to get involved with our “Friends of the Library.” I have the will – and we will find the way to get more books into our children’s hands.
Let’s also demand mayoral term limits and ward specific elections. It is time to empower the people of Santa Ana. Viva la Revolucion!
Up to now it was difficult to impossible for Council Members endoresed by the traditional political machine to be independent thinkers and voters on issues affecting the City.This was due to the fact that with few exceptions (Alvarez and the Ted Moreno slate)candidates were elected based on the support of the Political machine mentioned.This election demonstrated that this is no longer a requirement for a succesful campaign.The residents of the City are then the big winners.The reason is because Bustamante ,Benavidez and possibly the Mayor can now function independently of the machine.The machine is broken,time to set it aside.I believe the candidates when elected where idealistic,then found their actions restricted by the powers that worked their campaigns.When independent candidates managed to get elected they found they were unable to make changes because it was one or two of them.Now there is real chance of a Council majority independent of the tradidional powers.Independence from the traditional powers is the all significant idea,because now all the council can feel no fear of governing for the real reasons -for the benefit of the City’s residents.THEY are the WINNERS.The residents now know they have the power and will hold the elected officials accountable.
I like Aguinaga, but it bothers me that her children are enrolled in a private school – something I found out towards the end of the election cycle. Our next board member should be a proud supporter of PUBLIC schools.
Art, that mindless statement makes you sound like every teachers union hack I have ever encountered. Did the SAUSD teachers union put a Vulcan mind-meld on you?
Please explain to me how caring enough about your kids to make the sacrifice to send them to private school — and believe me it is a sacrifice — makes one a second-class citizen when it comes to being a school board candidate. Private school parents like myself pay the same bloody taxes as you and we are impacted, just like you, by a failing public school system. Has it occurred to you that as a parent involved in a school that knows how to provide a quality education might have a valuable perspective to offer?
Poster #2,
To be honest, I just feel that those of us who put in our kids in the SAUSD system are real stakeholders – the outcome is far more important to us than to someone like Aguinaga who won’t have to pay the price if she is unable to turn the district around. Doesn’t that make sense?
If you were going to have heart surgery, wouldn’t you rather go to an experienced heart surgeon, rather than to someone who has just read about it but has not lived it?
Nothing against Aguinaga – but why is she so obsessed with what happens to SAUSD, when she took her kids out already? I don’t get it.
Mr. Lomelei said, “Up to now it was difficult to impossible for Council Members endoresed by the traditional political machine to be independent thinkers and voters on issues affecting the City.This was due to the fact that with few exceptions (Alvarez and the Ted Moreno slate)candidates were elected based on the support of the Political machine mentioned.This election demonstrated that this is no longer a requirement for a succesful campaign.”
Or have we just traded one machine for another…now it’s Amezcua/Lomelei and the other Dem Party and Labor Unions instead of Police and Fire. Is that better?
Poster #4,
I’ll take Lomeli over Pulido ANY DAY! Take off the foil hat. Machines are over now in Santa Ana. May they stay dead. What matters now is what is best for the people of Santa Ana. Embrace the change or be run over by it…
Arthur,
At the top of my personal political agenda, is why people without children in the school system feel they have a say.
Rob Richardson comes to mind.
I put my money where my mouth is and moved my family out of SAUSD, I still own our home and my office there. Realtors and elites praise the area and then send their kids to Holy Family.
The simple fact is: Jubal should move! With housing values increasing as they have education has not improved.
Nothing will as long as we have disingeneous leaders like Pulido, Ream, Daucher and Umberg around.
Say what you will about Dunn but his wife walked his kids to the same shitty elementary school as everyone else for six years.
Thats more than the others.
I just fell off my soap box.
More soon.
Art, you’re argument makes no sense at all. In fact, it’s a kissing cousin to the standard Democratic attack that if you don’t support every education funding increase or school bond, you’re somehow “anti-education” and “against the kids.”
Last I checked, people like me and Ms. Aguinaga (whom I don’t know) are just as much citizens, voters and taxpayers as you are — of whether one has children in the public schools.
Why don’t we apply your logic to SAUSD employees? As you know, public school teachers send their children to private school at a higher rate than the general population. Would you support mandating that SAUSD employees have their children in public school in order to demonstrate their commitment to public education?
As for your analogy: if I were having heart surgey, I’d prefer a heart surgeon from a hospital where such surgeries will successfully completed, not one from a hospital where they are routinely botched.
Nothing against Aguinaga – but why is she so obsessed with what happens to SAUSD, when she took her kids out already? I don’t get it.
Maybe she’s a concerned citizen, Art. They do exist, you know.
I have lived in Orange almost my entire life. I’ve been concerned about what happens in OUSD since the early 1990s, yet I’ve never had a child in the OUSD system (until this semester, and she’s leaving at the end of this semester). I care about the state of public education becuase its success or failure has a huge impact on society — not just on public school parents.
If you want to exclude people who don’t have kids in public school from having a voice in public school, then I’d like a refund on my property taxes.
Duplojohn:
Why I should move? I’m not being argumentative — I just don’t understand what you’re talking about.
Jubal,
You and Aguinaga are certainly free to run – and I am free to oppose you. It is true that taxpayers without children are also stakeholders, but my argument is that parents have a larger stake – if their kids are in the public school system. Look, I am not opposed to private school. I graduated from Don Bosco Tech, but I cannot afford to send my kids to private school. So my immediate interest is to do what I can to improve the local school district. To that end, I want to elect board members who, like me, have our children at stake, and as such will have more of a vested interest in the final product.
Readers? What say you?
Jubal,
Who’s excluding you? Run if you want – but who says I have to support you? It’s a free country. I have every right not to vote to elect candidates who put their kids in private school.
Yes, you have a vested interest in the final product – but I have a greater interest. That is simply not debatable. In the end, we should all want our public schools to do well.
Now on to a bigger question – what about vouchers? Well, I support the concept. If you want to take your portion out of the public schools and spend it in a private school, that is fine by me. Sadly our fellow voters have rejected that concept many times. So in the meantime the only thing we can do is try to improve our public schools.
Art, you’re argument against Aguinaga is that because she sends her child/children to private school, she is not a “proud supporter of PUBLIC schools” but one simply does not follow from the other. Are public school teachers who send their children to private schools opponents of public schools?
And if you want to oppose a school board candidate for the sole reason he or she don’t have children in district schools, knock yourself out.
Art, pay attention — I didn’t say you have to support Aguinaga (and don’t drag me into it because I have no intention of running for school board and don’t want some stupid rumor getting started).
Of course you’re free to vote for against anyone for any reason. You can vote against a candidate because they have green eyes if you want — but that doesn’t make it aa good reason. And my point is your argument that private school parents are ipso facto not “proud supporters of public schools” and shouldn’t be elected to school boards is unsound and illogical.
And speaking of vouchers, I cannot count the number of times I heard your very argument made by educrats and teachers union hacks in attempts to discredit voucher supporters who didn’t have kids in public schools.
Jubal,
How is that? She pulled her kids out of public school. She had a good reason to do so, as she tells it, but nevertheless she has less of a stake now than the rest of us do.
Your question about public school teachers is a red herring. Why would they oppose their employers? They are exercising their right to put their kids where they want to. Similiarly, I am exercising my right to not vote for people who put their kids in private schools.
That’s democracy for you – a little messy but it works.
As for Aguinaga, she was already rejected by the voters this week. She is certainly free to run again, but this time I would prefer to find someone who is better qualified. To me the optimal candidate would be a well-educated parent or an educator.
BTW, you guys in Orange elected Steve Rocco to your school board – he is not a parent and he has no kids in your system. Congratulations…I hope you enjoy the rest of his tenure.
Red herring my foot. I’m just applying the public school loyalty test you’ve devised for public school trustees to public school employees. It’s your rule, not mine.
Yes, here in OUSD we have a board dominated by trustees who meet your criteria of having “kids in the system.” They follow the lead of the unions that elected them and the staff that run them. Rocco is a single irritant on a 7-member board of trsutees and has no impact. If he had kids in the system, he’d still be a loon, so throwing out the Rocco herring does nothing to support your arbitrary criteria of who is a “PROUD supporter of public schools.”
Good grief, Art — didn’t you used to support the Education Alliance? What happened to you?
Jubal,
Are you implying that the Education Alliance candidates are opposed to private schools? That is not what I thought they were about. Look, I just want my local schools to be better. That doesn’t mean I support sycophant candidates who will bow to the unions – but I do think that trustees should try to support the teachers instead of always fighting them.
What is your point? Are candidates who “don’t have kids in the system” better? Why? Shouldn’t we back the best candidates, period? I would be happy to support a candidate who had no kids in the district – but that candidate would have to be very qualified. In my estimate that means the candidate should be a college graduate – and having experience in education would be a bonus.
I didn’t imply antyhing. Again, Art, pay attention to what I’m saying: the Education Alliance doesn’t make having kids in public school a condition of support, and on a number of occasions has supported such candidates. being as you are an EA supporter, I find it odd that you are spouting the party line that is used by the teachers unions AGAINST those candidates.
Are candidates who “don’t have kids in the system” better? You know I’m not saying that, Art. Don’t put words in my mouth.
Shouldn’t we back the best candidates, period?
Exactly — which is why I question your arbitrary disqualification of candidates who have children in private school.
Let me get this straight, Art.
In your post, you say you cannot support Aguinaga because “it bothers me that her children are enrolled in a private school – something I found out towards the end of the election cycle. Our next board member should be a proud supporter of PUBLIC schools.”
In your last comment, you say:
“I would be happy to support a candidate who had no kids in the district…”
Which is it?
Jubal,
Read my statement again – I used the word “should” – not the word “must.” There is a difference. If we cannot identify a suitable candidate who meets the criteria I have put forth, then we must look for someone who meets the other criteria I have discussed – someone well-educated and/or someone with a background in education.
Examples would include John Hanna and Phil Yarborough of the Rancho Santiago Community College District. One is an attorney and the other is both an accountant and a part-time instructor. Perfect! I have backed both. Another example would be Dr. Ken Williams, of the OC Board of Education. I also supported Jordan Brandman for the Anaheim Union School Board, but he did not win, in this week’s election. He is quite young of course and has no children however he is a graduate of UCI, and he worked in Sacramento for more than one Secretary of Education.
I supported Aguinaga in the recent SAUSD election because I could not vote for Palacio, due to his past support for PLAs, and I would not vote for Noji, because she is arrogant and has been on the board for too long – without results to show for it. Aguinaga was at least a fresh face, with a good heart, but I had concerns about her. Besides the private school issue, she only has an AA, and while she has been involved in the commmunity and has worked for the school district in non-educational positions, her actual experience in education is not great. This time, as we strive to fill Tinajero’s seat, we have a chance to do our homework and find someone who is really qualified for the job. I hope that comes to pass.
I think by the way that I would be qualified for the job – but I don’t want it. I have my hands full as it is with my job, my family, and my own continuing education (I am currently enrolled in a graduate safety program at UCI’s extension campus). We’ll have to find someone else.
Thanks by the way for reading our blog and participating in this discussion. I have been reading yours as well for some time and your team is doing good work.
Art, I’m impressed: we have single-handedly generated a very long comments thread, at the end of which we are more in agreement than we apparently were at the beginning.
Art said,
I’m not convinced that youth should always come first as Art says.
The reality is that although they say Santa Ana has the youngest mean average population, they are not talking about youth. The average age in Santa Ana is 26.4, and is fact getting older, not younger.
This fact is demonstrated by the declining enrollment in the school district.
Another trend, recently documented in the OC Register, is that the fastest growing demographic sector in Orange County is senior citizens.
Part of the reason we are seeing this trend in Santa Ana has to do with the high priced housing, and the council will be making decisions on whether to build even more of this big dollar housing in the city. This can have the consequence of pricing younger families out of the area. Also, the downtown planning has been somewhat focused on lifestyle that favors empty nesters and those without large families. These new projects will continue that plan, making the area less attractive to family living.
Let’s hope our new council members have a clue to which direction Santa Ana is really heading before they make decisions on flawed perceptions, like doing everything for youth.
Art, our politicians in Santa Ana are already adept enough at creating divisions and factions…the last thing they need are people outside the system ENCOURAGING such divisions. So lay off the rabble-rousing and start encouraging some unity and consensus. You say you want what’s best for Santa Ana, yet you can’t stop the endless divisiveness. Enough already.
Right on #24! But you see Art does not want people to get along because Art is outside their world and if they get along Art will feel left out. Art is against peace.
N2justice,
What system are you referring to? If you are referring to the Pulido machine, news flash – it is sundered, and it is history. And is encouraging “unity and consensus” code for “let Pulido appoint someone of his choice to Ward 1?” If so, forget it. No thanks. What I am doing is not about divisiveness – it is about putting the people in charge of our city – what we have before us is a rare opportunity to create lasting change. We need to do that – and not bungle the opportunity in some kind of misguided Kumbaya strategy.
Poster #22,
You wrote, “We all do what we think is best for our children.” And yet you question what I am doing as a father? If you are going to do that, at least have the guts to use your name.
Yes, we just remodeled our home. We did it so each of our kids could have their own room. Quite frankly, that was a top priority for all of us.
We want the public schools to work for our kids. They have all gone through the fundamental system and are doing quite well. Our daughter is on the water polo and swim teams at Santa Ana High. My wife and her mom both graduated from Santa Ana High – and I like that we are continuing that tradition with our daughter. Our older son is a straight A student at Mendez. I am also very proud of my ten year old – he has my intellectual curiousity and a great imagination.
Yes, I am glad I went to a good private school, but I missed out on a lot by not going to a public school. I graduated with a 3.87 GPA, a year early, but really lacked direction. I might have had more advice had I been in a public school. It ended up taking me 17 years to finish my first degree – and this year I finished an MBA.
I am in a position now to be a role model to my children – I am an example of what happens when you get married very young and have to struggle through life – but I never quit and now I am doing quite well. And I was the first person in my immediate family to finish college. And now I am at the top of my field as a safety director for a $60 million contractor. God has been good to me.
Let’s not turn our backs on our public schools. Too many of our families have no other options – and if we take our kids out the schools will be the lesser for it. Instead, let’s work to elect better trustees and affect positive change. We can do it!
Poster 23,
There are still thousands of children in our city – and if we don’t do a better job of shepherding them many will grow up the wrong way and will end up increasing crime in Santa Ana. Bakersfield, with half our population, has SIX libraries. Surely we can do better?
Poster #22: You hit it right on the proverbial head. Art made certain choices, and by all accounts, is happy with them. He chose to make sure each kid had his/her own bedroom over a private education, among other things.
I don’t think Art meant he couldn’t afford it. He meant, given his spending decisions, he could not send his kids to a private school.
The bottom line is Art sees something of value in public schools while others don’t.
How about bringing back Aida Espinoza or Nadia Maria Davis Lockyear??? Both could hit the ground running because they have served before and know how things work.
#30
Let me give just one reason why Nadia Davis Lockyear should NEVER be allowed to make any decisions pertaining to children.
Before French Park had their traffic plan implemented, the traffic counts in front of Wallace Davis Elementary was 3,313 cars per day AFTER the barricades were put in that number dropped to 480 cars, that was a DECREASE of 2,833 cars per day.
Mrs Lockyear felt so strongly that the children of that school should dodge that extra 2,833 cars she had her husband AG Bill Lockyear step in and interfere with the process, the rest is history, the barricades are down the traffic is back.
You sure you want her?
#31
You know better; the voting that took place violated the civil rights of those denied the opportunity to vote.
Unfortunately many neighborhoods were legally led astray by our city government.
Gone are the days of Richardson and Pulido making backroom deals with neighborhood leaders. Deals that were illegal.
Ms. Davis merely evened the playing field.
#31
Nice dodge, but let’s bring this back to Lockyear, children, and cars. Nadia made the choice in supporting the plan that allowed 3,313 cars per day over 480 cars per day. Note for your file, there was no Pulido/Richardson conspiracy. It was the the same process used by every other neighborhood that had adopted a plan.
Sadly, at the end of the day the neighborhoods are noisier,dirtier, more dangerous, and certainly have a diminished quality of life for each and every resident.
You must be very happy