The Creepy, Yet Beautiful Street Art of Dan Witz Now in L.A.
Eye Nosh: Is This the Best Pastrami in America?
Does Traffic Get Worse After the End of Daylight Saving Time?
Silver Lake Art Crawl: Also a Food Truck Crawl?
Thomas Keller Comes Home: Book Signings and a Recipe(!)
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa yesterday seals the envelope containing his absentee ballot (AP Photo/Reed Saxon)
Only 239,374, or 15%, of the 1,596,165 registered voters in the city of Los Angeles turned out. "There was an election today?" one LAist reader wrote on Twitter. And that sentiment was almost like a theme--another reader asked "today was the election for the MAYOR? All I do is watch local news. How did I miss this?" In the same city primary in 2005, 377,699 voters came to the polls.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was reelected with about 55.5 percent of the total votes. A 5% difference would have put the mayoral race into a runoff. Attorney Walter Moore, who received 2.7% in 2005, was the runner up with 26% of the vote. The lower than expected numbers for Villaraigosa now has some speculating his unconfirmed run for Governor will now be a tougher battle. The mayoral ballot had ten challengers.
Villaraigosa ally, City Attorney candidate and current Councilmember Jack Weiss will face off with Carmen "Nuch" Tutanich--the guy with that insanely slick commercial--on the May 19th ballot. Weiss, who like the Mayor, refused to show up at debates.
And unlike Weiss, Councilmember Wendy Greuel sailed to victory for City Controller. She faced opposition from longtime political figure Nick Patsaoras and Kathleen "Suzy" Evans. Although Patsaoras was considered to be Greuel's biggest competitor and was mentioned in an attack ad, Evans was the runner up.
In Council District 5, which includes parts of the Valley, Westside, Hollywood and the Santa Monica Mountain range, six candidates vied for the spot. Two will go to the May 19th runoff: former Assemblyman Paul Koretz and David T. Vehedi.
The most heated debate on the ballot was over the controversial Measure B, the solar power/green jobs initiative pushed by Villaraigosa and the union behind the Department of Water and Power. It lost by a slim 1,325 votes, which makes it too hard to call with 100% certainty.
However, both sides during the night did claim victory. First, the Yes on Measure B side e-mailed a press release announcing their victory around 11:38 p.m. Perhaps an error on their part, but soon after, their lead turned sour. The grassroots No on Measure B campaign plans to hold a press conference this morning to announce a call to action regarding their own version of the solar plan. "There's no 'winners and losers' in the Measure B race," explained Stephen Box, the opposition's campaign director. "There's simply the opportunity for us to move ahead with a real innovative and inclusive solar plan." With all that said, the City Clerks Office will come out with the final and official results soon enough, putting to rest the results on this measure.
Measure E, an economic incentive for businesses, was the only other measure to lose. Measures A, C & D passed.
All odd numbered council districts were up, and save for the aforementioned 5th District, incumbents won with ease.
Three LA Unified School District and four LA Community College District seats were up as well. Incumbents Miguel Santiago and Kelly Candaele won outright and Angela Reddock and Nancy Pearlman--also incumbents--will go to a runoff. Steve Zimmer won the LAUSD District 4 seat (vacated by Marlene Canter), but the race for District 6 (vacated by Julie Korenstein) was extremely close with Nury Martinez leading Louis Pugliese by 482 votes and gaining the victory outright.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I knew he was going to be reelected, so I voted for ZUMA DOOGG.
WHOOOOP-TEEEE_WHOOOOOO!!!
Too bad more people didn't vote. Turnout was so light I was in and out of there in ten minutes. Hell, it took longer to park and walk the distance to the polling location and back than it did to cast the ballot. Of course I had already used the voting guide to select who and what I was voting for. I hope the opposition has a better plan than that proposed in Measure B.
I'm not surprised by Wendy Greuel's victory after her "stunt" outing local business that failed to pay their taxes. Brilliant move on her part; though I am still bothered by the obvious ploy to win votes at the 11th hour.
I was in mine for less than 5 minutes, but then again so was I in November. Don't know what to tell ya.
I'm a bit disappointed that Measure B went down. Like Bingo says, I hope the opposition has something more than just opposition to B.
I hope we're not screwing ourselves out of Federal Stimulus money by voting down a shovel ready project that was green and would have added new green jobs.
It sounds to me like Measure B fit the discription of the type of project that would have gotten some of that Federal funding.
can someone give me a decent reason for voting down Measure B?
First off, this is "Charter Amendment B," which might sound like nitpicking, but is actually a big difference. That said:
A) No quantifiable cost/benefit analysis was made. This means that technically the final project may cost us more, and provide a loss.
B) This gives a no-bid contract to the DWP to create solar power for Los Angeles. Note that DWP can ALREADY do what B outlines, B just makes it so that ONLY DWP can do this.
In summation, Charter Amendment B gives DWP exclusive rights to a currently open project without making them give the tax-payers an estimate in advance.
The real question is why the DWP doesn't go ahead with everything they propose without waiting to be guaranteed exclusive contract?
paul: Thanks for the clarification. If what you say is true "B" would be the wrong thing to have amended to the existing charter. We certainly don't need to aid an existing monopoly.
Oh and by the by, 'Charter Amendment' means that it would be amending the solar energy Charter that already exists, which is already eligible for federal funding, assuming City Hall has a plan for a project. 'B' just guarantees the project would automatically go to DWP, whenever they decide to present a plan, instead of to the best offer.
The fact that City Hall is twiddling away its time not opening bidding for a project while the DWP tries to lock in what can best be called a 'general idea' (far from shovel ready, despite the rhetoric) for a project is the real threat to our loss of federal funds.
I agree Paul. A DWP monpoly on solar power production certainly wouldn't be in the tax payer's or rate payer's best interests.
Is there a good website where you got your info? I'd like to be a bit more informed about what I just voted yes on.
here is the website of the VoteNoMeasureB Campaign:
http://votenomeasureb.com
Hey jrb,
There is no one specific website I got my information/based my decision on. It was mostly from research all around. Although I will mention that some of my least favorite places to dig around are "YES/NOonmeasureX.com" sites, as they really aren't objective.
I mostly did and recommend first off reading the actual proposal and background given in the voter guides. Then checking various "Voting Guides" such as the democratic/republican/libertarian/green parties for LA and SFV (they disagree more often than you'd expect) or independent groups like YPM, Latino groups, etc.
I also check endorsements by reputable groups and the reasoning behind them, including both major and minor publications.
What made me cautious re: B was the fact that most groups supporting/endorsing seemed to have either a "a guarantee is better than waiting for bidding, we need to act on the environment now," or a "better than nothing" argument. These are both victims of false logic and a very poor reason to support something.
First off, this proposition did not have a timeline either, so this whole argument is weak. Nor has DWP drafted this "sole bid" anyway; the time it'll take DWP to write one up will be the same amount it will take other entities to. Why not let them do the same?
That aside, the energy/environment situation didn't get screwed up in one day or even a decade. Its been gradual; waiting a few months to create and review bids will not make a difference in the scope of things. And if this really were an issue I would want the Sierra Club to be a bit more pro-active in having lobbied City Hall to get the move on spending the last few months opening and reviewing bids instead of writing proposals to let DWP have sole bid privileges.
I was actually quite disappointed in YPM, whom I respect, actually reasoning that transparency is less important than urgency. There is no reason we can't have both. In fact, it would be easier to get it passed that way. This is the same reasoning the Bush administration used in their now discredited & failed anti-terrorism policies, after 9/11.
Second off, there is no "nothing" to be better than. This is Los Angeles, California, and America. Since when do we accept that there is only one option?
My biggest problem in deciding on this issue was actually the "No on B" campaign. I'm always hesistant to side with the group chanting cliche phrases like "backroom deals," as those accusations are usually crutches for groups on the wrong side of a Prop for bad reasons. But if something looks fishy on both sides, there's nothing better to do than research. Thanks internet!
Anyway, I hope that helps.
Yea most of the "No on B" I read was mostly anti-union rhetoric, which to me is not a good agument and usually comes from the corporate greed over human need crowd. That actually pushed me more in favor of B. Thank you for your informed analysis on B.
One thing about privately produced green energy, (and please correct me if I'm wrong), isn't DWP required to buy it? There can never be an outright monopoly can there?
Another term of open border Mayor Villaraigosa in Los Angeles. That means keeping the Sanctuary city laws for 4 million illegal immigrants in the county. That means a continuation of deaths on the streets by and highways by illegal aliens. It also means forced taxation of billions of dollars to support the illegal foreign nationals residing in the city. That means hundreds of thousands of jobs, given to illegal aliens as business welfare in California or anywhere in the country.
It is the Last chance to save American jobs and to demand our lawmakers reinstate E-Verify as a MANDATORY law. Only the US legal population have the power to force reluctant politicians to vote for this law. The usual anti-sovereignty, pro-illegal immigrant critics are trying to sabotage it. Along with corrupt politicians who receive campaign contribution from the lobbyists, to weaken our immigration laws.
Sen. Harry Reid leads the wolf pack with the only efficient tool we have in our arsenal to stop the escalation of illegal labor. March 6 is the deadline to revitalize E-Verify for another 5 years or let it die. Without its power American Workers are at the mercy of the pariah business industry who can then employ illegal foreigners at minimum wage. If you value your job, within any trade or profession it is not safe. Even the high professional jobs have been stolen by visa over-stayers. Not every illegal alien comes from South of the border. Make your demands known at the Washington Switchboard (202) 224-3121. Keep calling and don't stop.
ok walter moore, no need to be a sore loser.
Aaaahhh!
Run for your lives!!!
It's the illegal aliens from outer space!!!!!
That photo of Villaraigosa is pretty telling. He is using his absentee ballot. He wasn't even sure if he would be around for Election Day.
They are mail-in ballots in California, not absentee. You don't have to not be in town in order to use them (unlike in some states, where you have to be away or unable to get to your polling place). I mean, yeah, he's the mayor. Who knows what will come up. You can also drop off mail-in ballots at a local polling place.
You mean "informed" LAist voters were unaware that Tony Villar bought and paid for Measure B?
Shocking!
Thank gawd for us valley voters.
Gee Tua, what was Walter Moore's plan? More of the Bushista; "Burn up all the coal and desil up because Jesus is going to rapture all the rightous up to heaven before the world goes to shit, so we don't need to worry about it." type stuff?
No need to thank us.
You're welcome.