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 6243 — DEEPLY 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!
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!
“…putting forward Flatlander and maybe Flat-Earther Lucille Kring as their champion”
Lucille’s Earth is indeed flat. Nothing outside her paltry two-day event horizon even exists.
Is that a typo for the 69th Assy District? 4.1% Turnout???? Let me guess — Under -represented?
Eureka! Thanks to a nice interactive district map at-
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/25/5599363/interactive-map-california-assembly.html
it looks like only about 1/4 (?) of the 69th is in Anaheim, and so would vote on an Anaheim measure, and that’s about 1/4 of the average 16% turnout. Withdraw the question.
NO! Wait a minute! those OTHER districts (Assy. at least) aren’t totally within Anaheim EITHER! Put the question BACK!
Sorry — my mistake. It was 14.1%. Fixed in the text.
39,279 voters; 5,535 turned out; 14.1 percent.
I’m happy, I found the neat map link!
No ROV’s office that I’ve ever seen is better than ours. The volume of free data that they publish is absolutely amazing.
What do you think of the substantive point of this post — that Measure D was killed entirely by the voters of Anaheim Hills? I was surprised — and, once I thought it through, pleased. And I’m also pleased that it was so easy to find through the data they provided!
Good catch! I’m encouraged by the outcome, but struggling to quickly attribute the CORRECT combination of cause and effect, (anticipating that the high-ticket advisors to the large check writers have already re-figured the house odds for the next round). So far, I have only scratched the surface of the tools and info beyond the SOV. I hope to find something there (or outside) that can translate the data to the maps, whose price doesn’t laugh at my box-of-crayolas budget!
As a flatlander, I wonder if the pitiful local turnout will widen the mailbox flood gap if money chases ‘low hanging fruit’ in the Hills, or will there be more effort here, in the hope that dangling districting attracts new voters?
With Anaheim’s wide geography, I think it’s increasingly important to share ads online, to fight balkanization, as Cynthia’s “E” flyer article demonstrates! And WHAT pro-active steps can be started NOW, to prevent 2012’s orchestrated drought of Candidate forums, and preserve impartiality, the supposed excuse ??????
BBORW, the Great Leftist Conspiracy to Steal Anaheim From the Public-Private Partnership Consortium will make sure that the turnout in November turns this into a much different ball game. Will those people support Galloway? Maybe, but a higher turn out in the Hills will also help Tait who seems popular there.
Kringle is now walking dead and all the Kleptocracy’s horses and all of their men aren’t going to be able to assemble her again.
As Anaheim Insider foresaw, the Kleptos will soon be bear-hugging Galloway.
Kring-ons. Those who stubbornly cling to perpetual Mayoral (losing) candidate Lucille Kring in the hope that maybe, just maybe, someday at east one of her positions sticks.
Don’t you just love that old swing era tune?