It’s a big responsibility on the shoulders of the voters of Santa Ana’s Ward 3, this month. And you know who you are, you’ve been immersed in this, badgered by both sides for a year, and you should have gotten your ballots in the mail by now. But just for the record, here is Ward 3, the north/northeastern part of the Golden City:
And as worthy and undeserving of recall as Mayor Pro-Tem Jessie Lopez is, this election is MUCH BIGGER than her – removing her from the City Council will completely alter the character and philosophy of your city. That’s why she is under attack by the Special Interests. Recalling Jessie would create a new, Corporatist council majority that would, rather than answer to the needs of the people, give these Special Interests everything they want.
By “Special Interests,” people mean interests other than their own. Fine. By “Special Interests” WE mean: an out-of-control, greedy police union (NOT the police or public safety themselves), allied with landlords and developers – the special interests with lots of money to spend on elections.
Right now Santa Ana has a majority that keeps those special interests in check, but that majority hangs by a thread, and that thread is Mayor Pro-Tem Jessie Lopez. If, God forbid, this recall succeeds, you can say goodbye to Santa Ana’s groundbreaking rent stabilization, goodbye to protections against unfair evictions, and HELLO to unaffordable sweetheart contracts that’ll push Santa Ana back toward bankruptcy.
SARMIENTO vs. SERRANO.
Both men are gone from Santa Ana government now, but this is a contest between two visions for Santa Ana, that of progressive-populist former Mayor (now OC Supervisor) Vince Sarmiento, and that of greedy, nihilistic, former cop union boss Gerry Serrano, who was finally let go but this Recall is the stink-bomb he left Santa Ana with – his final attempt to “burn the place down” from his home in Garden Grove.
In the great election of 2020, Santa Ana elected Mayor Sarmiento along with three allies (including Jessie) who turned the city around after 22 years of misrule by Miguel Pulido. The new People’s Majority created a Police Oversight Commission, Rent Stabilization, an Affordable Housing Ordinance, and an Immigrant Legal Defense Fund.
And they did all that while, for the first time, paying off Pulido’s debt, creating a $40 million surplus, increasing the financial reserves, ensuring a Double A credit rating, and making Santa Ana recognized as “one of the best managed cities in California.” That’s what can happen when a progressive government keeps the greedy special interests in check.
When Vince moved up to Supervisor, Ward 2 kept Santa Ana’s People’s Majority by electing the great Ben Vasquez. The special interests couldn’t wait till the 2024 election, where they know they’ll lose again, so they set to work destroying that majority with their current effort to remove Jessie. Don’t let them do it!
IF…
If you were one of the 6,786 Ward 3 voters who chose Jessie in 2020, you should immediately mark your ballot NO and get it into the mail! She did everything she said she was going to do when she ran – how rare is that? And she is widely described as the hardest-working and most accessible councilperson in Santa Ana history, by supporters and non-supporters alike. She’s done nothing to deserve being recalled, and if you don’t get your NO vote in, that could happen!
If you did NOT vote for Jessie in 2020, you still might consider voting NO on her recall (or abstaining.) She’s done what she said she’d do, honestly and industriously, and if you disagree with her positions you can vote against her next year. This unnecessary recall election, as we warned, will cost Santa Ana nearly a million dollars, and that ship has sailed, but the special interests who created this wasteful mess should not be rewarded.
If you’re a Santa Ana voter OUTSIDE of Ward 3, especially if you’re:
- one of the 29,493 who voted for Mayor Sarmiento,
- one of the 6909 who voted for Thai Viet Phan,
- one of the 4179 who voted for Johnathan Hernandez,
- or one of the 2235 who voted for Ben Vasquez last year…
…you should consider helping get out the vote in Ward 3 against the recall – the Serrano forces are trying to marginalize YOUR councilmember by putting them in the minority, and taking away YOUR voice. This desmadre affects the whole city.
Democrats!
Santa Ana’s voters are overwhelmingly Democrats, and all of Santa Ana’s politicians are “Democrats” of one sort or another. (By the way, Ward 3 Republicans should remember that Serrano also recalled rightwinger Ceci Iglesias for standing up to the police union – and it was wrong then as it is now for a powerful union to recall a politician for opposing them, and many of us Democrats said so at the time.)
Even the Serrano-backed minority of Bacerra, Penaloza and Amezcua have “D” next to their names, but they are outliers – a corporate-friendly fringe of the Party. I am proud, as a Democrat, to report that the County party, remembering that Democrats are the Party of the People, is standing strong against this corrupt Recall, and is hosting the upcoming events:
Wed, Oct 25 @ 5:30pm · California Working Families Party
No Special Interests in OC! Community Forum & Phone Bank for Jessie Lopez ›
Join us on Wednesday, October 25th at 5:30pm in Orange to discuss how moneyed special interests in OC act militantly to overcome the people’s interest…
Sat, Oct 14 @ 10am · California Working Families Party
Democratic Party of Orange County Canvassing Days of Action for Jessie Lopez ›
Join the Democratic Party of Orange County in showing up and walking for Santa Ana Mayor Pro-Tem, Jessie Lopez. Tell voters to vote NO against this co…
Sat, Oct 21 @ 10am · California Working Families Party
Orange County Young Democrats Canvassing Day of Action for Jessie Lopez ›
Join Young Democrats throughout Orange County in showing up and walking for the OCYD Young People’s Platform Champion Jessie Lopez against the corrupt…
Deadline November 14
but get in your ballots NOW!
If the people who knocked on my door are in ANYWAY Representative of Jessie. She’s doomed. Why do these “progressive” candidates choose foot soldiers who are so out of touch with residents?
The ESL learner (I am white and bi-literate and have lived in Mexico) who came to my house did not know who the mayor was or ho many wards there were and admitted she was ineligible to vote in the US.
NOT A GOOD LOOK.
Sounds like not their best hire. And sounds like you managed to humiliate her.
But then you were already against Jessie weren’t you? (Troll who can’t decide how to spell their fake last name)
I’ve never had any door-to-doorer who really knew anything.
Heh cuz you never got your door knocked on by yours truly!
True. I get kids that are being paid by somebody or other. It almost seems like an utter waste.
Like the nice bilingual young man that came to my door to tell me to vote for Measure A. It was all “the maids need a panic button!” just like when they were getting signatures. He had no idea that the kleptos had already taken care of that issue. He got a little embarrassed.
Having had my door knocked upon by you Vern – I can testify that you do indeed know your stuff. You almost had me convinced …. not 🙂
Worse, it’s the “NOT A GOOD LOOK” troll who hangs usually out with Neshanian and Nevah Surrendah at Casa de Chumley, with a vacation home in our spam folder.
Who the hell cares whether the person who was hired to deliver a brief message and some literature to you knows who Santa Ana’s Mayor is? If you wanted to debate her, you should have slipped her $20 and allowed her to use a lifeline by calling the campaign office.
That picture of Serrano and the Bacerra guy gets me every time. Just can’t help but think of a hungry infant excited to nurse.
You could be nicer. It is a touching and memorable portrait of special-interest lactation.
Evocative of Psalm 131.
Yes, Bacerra’s soul is calm. Selah!
The distinguished Santa Ana Mayor has weighed in, sending out this text to Ward 3 voters:
I don’t remember ever seeing anything like this – a Mayor or even councilperson telling voters to recall their colleague. It was clear that Valerie didn’t like Jessie, and we saw the beginning of this when Valerie publicly accused us recall opponents of exaggerating the cost of the recall (which we weren’t.) But THIS…
Valerie Amezcua will do ANYTHING for her police-union funders.
This comes a week after the police union threw a fundraiser for Valerie’s re-election at the Elks Lodge. The new union boss John “Kach” Kachiriski, now known as “Serrano 2.0” was there along with Tom Daly, Avelino, and one “Papa Jo Castellanos (on 4850 time injured officer)”
SOMEBODY’S gotta take out Valerie for Mayor next year. After Jessie beats this recall.
She has turned out SO much worse than I had imagined.
I’m sorry, but who exactly recognized Santa Ana “as one the best managed Cities in California?” Best managed anything and Santa Ana are rarely mentioned in the same breath. Sorry, a $40 million reserve for a budget the size of Santa Ana isn’t something to brag about either. Yes, the dream team has some notable achievements in their first three years, but it’s only been three years and Santa Ana will still be a punchline for some time to come.
I encouraged my relatives in Ward 3 to vote no on the recall – they beat me to it only because they’ve been trained to automatically vote against anything and anyone police and fire unions support.
The Serrano / Amezcua pro-recall forces are starting to remind me of our own anonymous trolls – they’ll just pull the most unlikely things out of their asses. Ward 3 voters have been told that Jessie voted to raise rents 15%, and that she voted to take away kids’ lunches. It’s like fighting Trump out here.
Is this in writing or otherwise recorded?
Who’s taking credit for these lies? Do they have an FPPC number?
I believe it is the things door to door people have been telling voters – back when getting signatures, and now when trying to pick up YES ballots.
Wow. Talk about a curveball out of left field. Do I speak in mixed-up baseball metaphors? Very well, then I speak in mixed-up baseball metaphors:
https://voiceofoc.org/2023/10/santa-anas-police-union-backed-recall-election-could-be-stalled/
In short cuzza redistricting, and apparently through nobody’s fault but Registrar Page’s, the recall may be FUBAR.
“Page reached out to Voice of OC underscoring that Santa Ana is in the driver’s seat in deciding whether the recall election moves forward, but that he was seeking direction for whether the election should proceed.”
Meaning, the Council will say whether or not the recall proceeds. Well, Jessie would be conflicted out, and the vote will be 3-3. Which, from what I hear, puts it back in Page’s lap. This is hilarious. And as so many dopes on TV wrongly say, UNCHARTERED territory.
If Page allows it to go forward, Jessie team should be ready with a writ of supersedeas. I know of a Democratic lawyer living in District 3 who I’d think might take this on if the need arises.
Yeah, that Page guy is now saying it’s up to the City if they want to proceed. Well how can that even be a thing?
I guess it’s a thing if a judge says it is.
The Register article on this explains that a little better: in a municipal recall (in California) it’s the City Clerk that is actually calling the shots while the County Registrar is just doing the administration.
And of course the City Clerk of Santa Ana takes her orders from the Santa Ana City Council.
You kind of almost expect a 3-3 vote with Valerie, Phil and David pushing full steam ahead with what the cop union wants, but really how could they justify continuing such a flawed election that disenfranchises so many voters?
Can’t wait to see what happens Monday. I hope to report on it here immediately.
California Code, Elections Code – ELEC § 11045
“Only registered voters of the electoral jurisdiction of the officer sought to be recalled are qualified to sign a recall petition ..”
It would seem to me that the recall petition signatures were gathered in the correct district. That being the new 2022 Ward 3 boundaries. The recall should go forward.
Well that SOUNDS clear. Anyone else have time to look up the whole context? I’m busy today still canvassing against the recall.
No, because she is not an elected official from the new district. She was elected from the old district. Its voters control her fate.
This technically means that, after redistricting, some voters have voted for (or against) two different members of the city council while others have voted for none. That’s odd, but of you think about it it makes sense. If she were not still representing the old district to which she was elected, a hostile majority could have reached out to draw her into a different new district and then argue that, as a result of their line drawing, she now had to resign because she wasn’t living in the new district. That sort of game playing is bad.
The problem of over- and under-representation of some voters is not as big as might be feared because, if a politician is interested in re-election, they are going to represent the interests of the new district anyway. Even if they aren’t running for reelection, their failure to represent the new district may lead to all sorts of screaming and moaning from their constituents that had not voted for them at Council meetings, and no one needs that.
A classic recent example of someone who had to represent the original district they were elected in while campaigning in the new district is Supervisor Katrina Foley, who was bounced around like a ping-pong ball between districts for a while by a hostile majority. As I recall, she handled it quite well.
So while your intuition is reasonable, Tardif, it doesn’t happen to be true. The “electoral jurisdiction” implicated in the Code sections you cite is the one to which she was re-elected, not the one into which she was redistricted. THEY are the ones being asked to change their initial opinion on that earlier race.
From the California Secretary of State – Procedures for Recalling State and Local Officials (2023)
Who Can Sign Petition
Registered voters who are qualified to vote for the office of the officer sought to be recalled can sign a recall petition. (Elections Code §§ 322, 11045)
“vote for” … Looking forward – NOT backward!
Reading the clear language of the law:
“Registered voters who are (“ARE” as in present tense) qualified to vote for the office of the officer sought to be recalled can sign a recall petition.”
Diamond – I cited chapter and verse in the law and the SoS Procedural Guidelines – nothing in there references your position and in fact argues against your opinion.
The Foley situation is not applicable as the AG determined in that case that she was allowed to expend County funds for her events – nothing about a recall election.
The old Ward 3 voters participated in electing J-Lo, but that does not confer on them the right to participate in an election in a district in which they do not reside and in which they will have no direct Council representation going forward.
I’ll type this slowly, so you’ll have a chance of understanding:
She is not representing the new district until the next election comes up. She is representing the old district, the leadership of which will not yet have converted until after the next election. They are the ones who elected her. They are the ones who decide whether she stays, in any election preceding the one a year from now.
The problem is occurring only because, rather than waiting for the next election, the SAPOA faction wants her out now, before the representation of the district changes over.
This happens all of the time with redistricting, because the ten year cycle of the census does not perfectly map onto the four year cycle of Council elections. The same thing happens with the State Senate and its four-year term, where I believe that Josh Newman currently has responsibility for his old district as well as sharing responsibility with Dave Min for SD-27.
Not much can be done about these weird aspects of a system with redistricting until we can repeal the laws of arithmetic. In the meantime, I suggest that you try to intervene in any hearing on this and file a brief explaining your exciting find.
Note that the regulations you cited just refer to “the district.” That doesn’t distinguish between your assertion and mine. It does not reference, or argue against, either of our positions. You just have to know about this weird kink in the system that comes up every year that ends in a 2 — or in this case, a 3 — but thankfully affects very few races.
From your fingers to Valerie’s, Phil’s and David’s ears.
Council is having a special meeting on this Monday at 5; first half closed second half open.
Clearly Jessie can’t vote on this, so it could turn out 3-3, then what? Except when I think about it, it would be outrageous if ANY of them voted to proceed with the recall, which didn’t have enough qualified signatures after all, and for which over a thousand voters haven’t been mailed ballots? Valerie and Phil already look like monsters, let’s see if they can get worse.
Yeah it’s an F-up. Neal Kelly wouldn’t have screwed up like this.
Cunningham finally wrote about this mess yesterday, I was surprised it took him so long. And he didn’t write much that the Voice and Register hadn’t already; I assumed he’d have some arguments in favor of continuing the recall election, but Tardif is working much harder on that.
https://ocindependent.com/2023/10/errors-by-rov-city-clerk-inject-uncertainty-into-jessie-lopez-recall/
One interesting thing – he predicts (as was my initial kneejerk prediction) that today’s vote will be a 3-3 deadlock between the 3 members who already opposed the recall vs the 3 who already supported it. And maybe Matt has inside info that will happen (since this is apparently his new circle) and maybe he doesn’t.
That prediction, though, is somewhat insulting – it assumes that NONE of the six members will be swayed one way or the other by the new developments. It assumes Penaloza for example won’t find any merit in the registrar’s new concerns, or Johnathan for example won’t read the excerpts of California code that Tardif has quoted and think “Gee, maybe this election really has to go forward after all.” Everyone just sticking to their own corner and justifying that with whatever’s handy and sounds credible.
And maybe that’s what’ll happen.
And the question nobody seems to know the answer to, what happens next if it deadlocks?
Check back this evening!
I’d think that if it deadlocks, then the City will have failed to give the instructions to the Registrar that he deems necessary for the election to go forward, so it wouldn’t.
If it did, Lopez could easily challenge any negative result in court.
They should just leave it lay. Maybe they can ask Sarmiento to discipline Page for the error, once he stops laughing at their request.
I think that the person Council is supposed to give instruction to is their own City Clerk; Page just does the grunt work.