.
As you may know, there WERE a couple of important matters that were supposed to be voted on at last Tuesday’s Anaheim City Council meeting. Apart from the burning issue of what to do about a Police Department run amok, two vital questions were going to be considered for placement on November’s ballot – two questions many of us see as related to the police war against Anaheim’s poor neighborhoods – Whether or not to change to “district elections” so that all neighborhoods of the huge city will have political representation, and whether to put all future hotel tax subsidies up to a popular vote. AND this was the last possible meeting at which the Council could put such questions onto the November ballot, this was the deadline.
Councilwoman Gail Eastman, along with her colleagues Harry Sidhu and Kris Murray, constitute a council majority that not only opposes both those democratic reforms, but even resists putting them on the ballot for Anaheim’s voters to decide. But evidently Gail was really NOT looking forward to having to publicly cast a vote keeping the popular measures off the ballot. As it turned out, she was saved from this uncomfortable predicament by the riots outside Council chambers, riots inspired by the recent rash of police killings, which caused this meeting to be cut short.
What was remarkable was the exhilarating sense of relief Gail Eastman felt at this, which impelled her to let loose with the following Tourette’s-like message to a group of her “Colony” neighborhood supporters when she got home:
…It appears to have been quiet now for almost an hour so I trust we will all get a good nights sleep. The bonus now is that a threat of seeing either the TOT [room tax] issue or districting on the November ballot is past.
In spite of how it happened, it was a big time win for all who opposed seeing that placed on the November ballot. We could still be asked to vote on both issues in the future if 15% of the registered voters in the city sign a petition requesting it. We may also be facing a recall if some of tonights speakers follow through on their threats, but that will be a fight for another day.
Tonight we celebrate a win with no shots fired!
Thanks my friends for standing with us!
Gail
[As an aside it should be noted that, even though most of us know about these remarks through the excellent Voice of OC, THEY got the info from the increasingly invaluable NoJordanBrandman.com, to which we are now posting a permanent link.]
When Politicians Apologize
(with Brandman)
On the sober morning after, discovering that her private communication had gone public and realizing how insensitive it sounded, Ms Eastman issued an “apology.” But it is such a typical politician’s apology – weaselly and totally missing the point. You just KNOW she copped to “a poor choice of words,” clueless to the fact that it was the SUBSTANCE of her remarks that has the county outraged.
Well, okay, sure, “Tonight we celebrate a win with NO SHOTS FIRED” – that there IS a real poor choice of words, sort of Freudian-slip, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot poor choice, at a moment when Anaheimers were being bruised with rubber bullets for protesting other Anaheimers getting shot execution-style in the back of the head.
But the gist of her message remains, intended and unapologized-for: First, that by any means possible the people must be PREVENTED from voting on these two issues which she opposes; that the bloody mess outside, while perhaps regrettable, at least had the silver-lining of aiding her anti-democratic platform; and that, last and best of all, Gail Eastman didn’t have to cast an uncomfortable, unpopular vote to git ‘er done!
The Matter of the Triple Stabbing of Democracy
So, consider: Gail Eastman – along with her accomplices Sidhu and Murray:
- Doesn’t want to “let the people vote” on subsidies OR to have their own district councilpeople as all other California cities the size of Anaheim do;
- Doesn’t even want to allow you Anaheimers to decide whether those two ideas are good ones this November; and
- Prefers YOU not to see her cast a vote on this matter herself, and is overjoyed that shootings and riots absolved her of that pesky, embarrassing task.
That’s what I mean by the title of this post, and that’s what is meant by Greg Diamond’s beautiful photoshop, built from a perfect Chris Prevatt photo of the Councilwoman.
While we’re throwing rocks and bottles here…
How about Gail’s two Council accomplices, Harry Sidhu and Kris Murray? By all accounts, Gail has generally been the most reasonable of the anti-democracy trio, and reform forces had the most hopes of winning her over. If Harry and Kris are worse than Gail, the triple-stabber of democracy – imagine that!
How about Senator Lou Correa, Assemblyman Jose Solorio, and Assembly candidate Tom Daly, all putative Democrats, who endorsed this politician, assisting her invaluably? Think of all the Anaheim Democrats who must have voted for her on their say-so. What do they have to say now? Anything?
And, while we’re thinking about that chaotic aborted Council meeting, how about those “hard-hats” from the Buildings and Trade Unions, the most reactionary and self-centered corner of the Labor movement? They were at the meeting to SUPPORT the bed-tax giveaway, thinking it benefits them when in actuality there’s nothing in the agreement that prevents the developer from bringing in cheap labor from Arizona and New Mexico as these hotels generally do. They were there at the urging of the developer and Kris Murray, over a hundred of them in their hard hats, with a protest which was planned before the recent shootings. They went into the chambers early and took up all the available seats. This is why there was no room inside for the pro-democracy and anti-police-brutality forces. This is why the people who were shut out turned angry and surly (although it looks like there were provocateurs involved as well.) There will be time in the future to look at the problem of reactionary unions fighting against democracy in Anaheim.
Moving Forward in Taking Anaheim Back
Now that no reform measures will be on Anaheim’s November ballot, it’s going to be a busy early 2013 in that town, preparing for one heck of a Special Election – no matter who wins the two Council seats being vacated by termed-out Lorri Galloway and Harry Sidhu. Let’s get it all on that ballot:
- Some kind of police reforms
- “Let The People Vote” on future hotel and other corporate subsidies
- District Elections – Six districts plus an at-large mayor – better than what Mayor Tait actually agendized
- And, I’d say, recall Murray and Eastman!
But then, hey, I don’t live in Anaheim even though I’ll be there a lot including at noon today. What do you-all say?
*Chairman Vern,
As usual..a well thought out entry. You do know which direction you want to go and we have to give you reasonable kudos for that. Too many are just nay sayers and have not idea on much of anything. Except maybe a Baby NO!
OK, these are some pretty interesting times we have to admit. We guess we will start by saying we disagree with you on a few items here and some short reasons why:
(1) Letting people vote on Corporate Subsidies and the Hotel Tax. No, that is why
you vote folks in. If you don’t like what they vote for…..vote them out. These items
just require good consulting from the City Manager to the City Council which gives
them the necessary facts. That’s it – Council gets to vote it clearly up or down and
take the heat from the public if the idea doesn’t go over – at the next election cycle.
(2) Six Districts and an Elected Mayor concept. Pretty good idea probably. This will
require changing the Charter if Anaheim has one vs. General Law. This will require
the citizens to get signatures and put that item up for a vote of the people. Voted
up or down in the next election cycle.
(3) Police Reforms: This is a case of putting the cart before the horse at this time. Obviously the Kelly Thomas case in Fullerton has some lap overs in Anaheim, but in this case…they have an Independent Investigator at the State level…which could elevate to the Federal Level if true darkness is found – which we believe will not be the case. After all of the case comes out and “the people” don’t agree….that might be the time to put an initiative up before the people to make Anaheim another OC Sheriff
Contract City. Voted up or down in the following election cycle after all the facts are out.
Finally, you might be a little too tough too soon on your “Three Bears”. One vote does not make a Recall….in our opinion. One false step either. The situation was very much different in Fullerton where the stonewalling was quite obvious. The lack of action on a critical issue dismissed with a wave of the hand and therefor caused a successful Recall campaign. This is not the case in our opinion just yet in Anaheim.
Cool your jets Sub-Commandante Vern…..but keep up the good work too.
Why put district elections on the ballot now, when the community’s CA Voting Rights Act case is still working its way through the courts? For that matter, is it really a good idea to put civil rights up for a popular vote in a city where out of town money dominates campaign contributions and Anaheim Hills dominates at the ballot box?
Well, Eric, I’d answer first that it would be good if Anaheim chose that system for themselves rather than having it forced on them by a lawsuit … but if the former doesn’t happen then the latter still could, or am I wrong about that?
And also, it seems like a good Spring-2013 project for all Anaheim’s small-d democratic forces, and helpers from nearby towns, to pass this whole package of reforms together. And it would be a very positive channeling of all the current angry energy. Call it Anaheim Spring! (Lotsa Arabs here anyway)
Interesting points, Vern. I’m not sure that we would even be talking about district elections right now if the lawsuit had not been filed. It’s worth noting that since district elections will require a charter amendment, the voters will have their say at the ballot box either way. You’ve obviously thought about the issue. If you’re interested, I hope you’ll consider getting more involved with those of us who’ve been working on it. There will always be a place at the table for folks who bring ideas and are willing to put boots on the ground when the time comes. 🙂
You got it! And of course you’re right that it was the ACLU that brought the idea up.
You know how to contact me, right? I think we met at a Julio Perez event where I played piano.
I would say that the lawsuit brought district elections into current public discourse, but the idea grew out of conversations within the community.
Vern, I’ll echo Eric here. The suit alleges Latino voter disenfranchisement via at-large elections. How can that very question be put before an at-large election? Don’t take Tait’s bait.
I’ll cross post something later this evening here for all to ponder.
It would be a good way to get people to register to vote. And if it failed, that would be telling. We know how many vote in each precinct.
Not sure the inflammatory photo is the best way to go for a town already sitting on a powder keg. However, I have to agree, when I saw that email/Jason’s blog post outing it, I was not as concerned with the line about “no shots fired” as I was that an elected leader was celebrating not having to make a decision on something where passions ran high on both sides. One may apologize for choice of words, and I believe that Gail truly regrets HOW she said it, but the mentality behind the statement was what disturbed me personally. Now, I know Gail, she genuinely loves Anaheim, and she is sticking to her guns (pardon MY choice of words there) because she truly believes she is acting in the best interest of the community. She is wrong, but i believe to the depths of my soul that she is sincere in her motives. The obvious remedy is to call a special meeting of the Anaheim City Council, and complete the Agenda that was so rudely interrupted. What are they afraid of? Either they believe they speak for the people, and can let the people speak, or they are trying to push through something they know voters do not want. The only way to test whether Anaheim supports their decisions is to allow that vote.
As far as Districts, I see them as an open door for corruption and special interest on a level that makes the current leadership look like a gathering of the Peace Corps. These people use their majority vote to exact revenge and retribution on other Council members who do not follow in lock-step with the pre-ordained decisions of the power structure, just imagine how much havoc they can wreak dumping all the “crap” projects into the District of the one honest Councilmember who opposes their majority voting block. But because we are being sued, we have no choice but to put this to a vote of the people, which is why Poor Mayor Tait was backed into a corner he did not want to be in, and put it on the agenda. If this goes to court and we lose, the courts will carve up our city into districts of their own choosing. Putting it on the ballot means that A) we let voters decide, and hope and pray residents choose not to do this, which makes the lawsuit go away. B) in the event voters do choose to enact Districts, at least Anaheim will have a say in how they are established, rather than an outside court with no knowledge of our community needs beyond census records and cold reports.
As far as the hotel subsidies, the exact same people now screaming against letting people vote about where to spend that TOT were the folks who were fighting in 2007-2008 to change our City Charter so that changes to zoning in the Resort that affect TOT are put to a vote of the people first. I know because I was in the trenches with them, and the arguments being made now are in direct opposition to what we said back then.
While we agree in many of these issues, and I appreciate that this site has finally become a place where we can respectfully agree to disagree and engage in discussion instead of the personal attacks of times past, I also think that we get nowhere in the conversation by demonizing Councilmember Eastman with this kind of imagery, and frankly I know plenty of people who will refuse to read your well-reasoned argument because they can it get past the photo.
Regardless of where one stands on the issue of district elections, it’s worth noting that if it goes on the ballot and voters reject it, the lawsuit will not go away. Such a turn of events might even strengthen the legal case.
So I thought, Eric.
I’ve heard your arguments against district elections, Cynthia. I think we should look at the experiences of other cities that have them. Am I wrong – doesn’t every California city the size of Anaheim or bigger have district elections? Are they all nightmarish?
Anaheim is the largest city in California without district elections. Nationwide, 83% of cities over 200,000 in population use them.
So how the hell bad could it be? Cynthia?
Cynthia,
If you have a better idea of how to illustrate the term “triple-stabbing” in the title, send it on over and I’ll swap it in. When given the assignment, I found that my options were surprisingly limited. Try looking up “triple stabbing” on Google Images; the choices are pretty lousy. (Plus, it was late at night.)
While your criticizing some of my artwork would bother me deeply, I’ll accept your criticism of this one. I’m more appreciative of the compliment that this site is truly is one of those screwy places that the world sometimes spits out where people from across the political spectrum actually can get together and jabber or debate at each other with bearable levels of conflict. I have conservatives here whom I would actually ask for a ballot recommendation in a non-partisan race — and that is a rare treat. So that’s for noticing that.
If I actually thought that the image would provoke violence in Anaheim I’d take it down in a roadrunner-puff-of-smoke instant.
Actually the artwork itself is very well done, no arguments, my objection is to the assignment of triple stab?! Just poor timing I think.
Whoops my bad! Bad assignment of triple stab! Hey sister, what about the fact that every California town the size of Anaheim has district elections? Are they all screwed blue and tattooed?
It’s a metaphor. It is not, I believe, inciting violence. If it wants to incite violence, it will have to get in line.
Vern — there are worse things you could have said she was doing to democracy, some that at some point I would have refused to illustrate. “Stabbing” is sort of a moderate use of metaphor.
No, I would NOT have asked you to illustrate her teabagging democracy.
I was actually imagining something even worse.
The only thing the image incites is flashbacks of Chuckie from Child’s Play!
Right on” Admiral” Vern Nelson, right on!!!!
*As those that are very familiar with District Elections…..as we have them here in Newport Beach…..there is little argument that most District Reps. have their feet held to the fire over “home rule issues”. When we brought in the Newport Coast, the biggest sticking point was having that area redistricted so that ONE Councilmember would be responsible for them. So far, it has worked out well. Drawing the District Lines is the part of the process which needs intense Citizen Outreach and Agreement.
Cynthia of course is right about possible corruption, but then – name a system that doesn’t have that possibility? Knowing where you live and who your Councilmember is makes for local Government that then seeks a workable majority. You still need four votes ….we say in Newport Beach. As you can see with Costa Mesa…which still has the Anaheim at-large system…..sometimes you wind out getting a lot of 4 to 1 votes.
An argument might be made that 7 Districts are far superior to the standard five…because you wind up getting better representation.
As far as the lawsuit is concerned? Nah…..that’s just hogwash that spends money on a bunch of ugly “attorneys without borders”! The courts have a great tendency to support the “Status Quo”. We have not seen a case go Against the Charter or having it as being Unconstituional…..and there seem to be years of judicial proceedings that have gone before. Chairman Vern, where is your Case on this issue that stood muster?
The Chief is a good one, the Mayor is a good one and the Councilmembers do not appear like mad dogs in a kennel. With an adequate investigation, the worst that could happen might be a “Consent Decree” like that which happened in LA. Oversight by the FBI for a number of years. That would take a lot of sworn testimony that would uncover a “Culture of Terror for Minorities” – which we doubt could ever be proved.
The only other solution would again require a majority vote of the City Council to go to the OC Sheriff and ask to make the town – a contract city.
By the way, something that can be done now which might be a good consideration is making issues which might require a vote of the people – what they call a Super Majority….4 or more to one. 5 or more to two – rather than a simple majority. But that is something you Colonists Activists can think on for a while. After all – these suggestions are only coming from Sailors, Sea Kings and Indians.
Ms. Eastman doesn’t seem to be alone in wondering why voters should be able to VOTE on anything except electing legislators to do their bidding (aka big biz). I attended California Democrats Convention and I heard someone else publicly comment that he didn’t think Californians should be able to have referendums because that work should be left to legislators. I almost had a coronary on the spot! I guess they both would agree with the article http://www.tnr.com/article/world/96990/greece-debt-crisis-referendum
It argues that referendums undermine Democracy. What???? I argue that if legislators worked for and listened to the people, maybe we wouldn’t need referendums!
*California Initiatives are sacrosanct…..since the days of Governor Hiram Johnson, the intiiative process has served the folks of California well.
Big difference however for city issues. In most cases the electeds do their famous Mugg-Wump impression and say “the people should decide”. This gets them off the hook for controversial issues. Sure, in some cases as we did in Newport Beach….we wanted Term Limits and no one on the council would touch it. Finally, one our brave council members started the collection of the necessary signature and the issue passed hands down. We have wanted to get an “Elected Mayor” for some time, but
there is no folks with pitchforks and torches out there yet.
In most cases however, the elected need to make those tough calls on auto dealerships and what some major Corporation that runs their town ….wants to do.
Then, the citizens can throw those rascals out if necessary.