OC Political

A right-of-center blog covering local, statewide, and national politics

  • Custom Campaigns

    Custom Campaigns
  • DMI

  • Allen for Assembly

  • Ramos for Costa Mesa

  • Bennett for Fullerton

  • Lalloway for Irvine

  • Sachs for Mission Viejo

  • Grangoff for Orange

  • Alexander for CUSD

  • Glasky for IUSD

  • Contact Us to Purchase an Ad

  • Lincoln Club of Orange County

Posts Tagged ‘term limits’

Half are Republicans, Half are Democrats, and Other Random Stats on Orange County’s Directly-Elected Mayors

Posted by Chris Nguyen on November 20, 2012

The New Republican Irvine City Council Majority:
Councilman Jeff Lalloway, Councilwoman-Elect Christina Shea, and Mayor-Elect Steven Choi

Partisan Breakdown

Since 2004, Republicans have held a 4-2 advantage among Orange County’s directly-elected mayors:

  • Anaheim: Tom Tait (since 2010), Curt Pringle (2002-2010)
  • Garden Grove: Bill Dalton (2004-2012)
  • Orange: Carolyn Cavecche (2006-2012), Mark Murphy (2000-2006)
  • Westminster: Margie Rice (Republican 2004-2012; Democrat 2000-2004)

The two Democrats were:

  • Irvine: Sukhee Kang (2008-2012), Beth Krom (2004-2008)
  • Santa Ana: Miguel Pulido (since 1994)

Anaheim’s Tait has Orange County’s only four-year mayoral seat, so he was not up for election this year. Major changes were in store with three mayors termed out (Garden Grove’s Dalton, Irvine’s Kang, and Orange’s Cavecche) and one mayor voluntarily retiring (Westminster’s Rice), leaving only Santa Ana’s Pulido seeking re-election this year.

While Steven Choi captured the Irvine mayoral seat for the Republicans, Bruce Broadwater of Garden Grove and Tita Smith of Orange captured their respective mayor’s posts for the Democrats.

The Republicans are:

  • Anaheim: Tom Tait (term limit: 2018)
  • Irvine: Steven Choi (term limit: 2016)
  • Westminster: Tri Ta (no term limit)

The Democrats are:

  • Garden Grove: Bruce Broadwater (term limit: 2020)
  • Orange: Tita Smith (term limit: 2018)
  • Santa Ana: Miguel Pulido (term limit: 2020)

It could be worse though, like the 2000-2002 line-up of directly-elected mayors, which had Orange’s Mark Murphy as the sole Republican:

  • Anaheim: Tom Daly (1992-2002)
  • Garden Grove: Bruce Broadwater (1994-2004)
  • Irvine: Larry Agran (2000-2004)
  • Orange: Mark Murphy (2000-2006)
  • Santa Ana: Miguel Pulido (since 1994)
  • Westminster: Margie Rice (2000-2004 as a Democrat; 2004-2012 as a Republican)

2012 Demographics

An odd sidenote about 2012: in an election that saw Asian Americans vote 3-1 for Barack Obama, Orange County’s Asian American directly-elected mayors went from consisting of one Democrat (Kang) to consisting of two Republicans (Choi and Ta).

While Cavecche was replaced by Smith in Orange, women lost ground as Rice was replaced by Ta in Westminster.

Term Limits

Anaheim, Garden Grove, and Santa Ana have eight-year term limits (two four-year terms in Anaheim and four two-year terms in Garden Grove and Santa Ana).  Orange has a six-year term limit (three two-year terms).  Irvine has a four-year term limit (two two-year terms).  Westminster has no term limits (two-year terms).

Santa Ana’s mayoral term limit is the newest, having been adopted this month.  Irvine’s mayoral term limit is the oldest, taking effect in 1991.

Anaheim has the toughest term limit on Councilmembers who want to be Mayor.  A first-term Councilmember running for Mayor may only serve one mayoral term.  A second-term Councilmember may not run for Mayor.

Excluding Westminster’s non-limit, Garden Grove and Irvine have the most generous term limit for Councilmembers who want to be Mayor.  In both of those cities, when Councilmembers term out, they can run for Mayor, and when they term out as Mayor, they can run for Council, in a never-ending merry-go-round.

Age

After the 2012 election, the mayoral median age is 60.5 with a mean age is 59.3:

  • Garden Grove: Bruce Broadwater (74)
  • Irvine: Steven Choi (68)
  • Orange: Tita Smith (65)
  • Santa Ana: Miguel Pulido (56)
  • Anaheim: Tom Tait (54)
  • Westminster: Tri Ta (39)

Before the 2012 election, the mayoral median age was 58 with a mean age of 62.3:

  • Westminster: Margie Rice (83)
  • Garden Grove: Bill Dalton (69)
  • Irvine: Sukhee Kang (60)
  • Santa Ana: Miguel Pulido (56)
  • Anaheim: Tom Tait (54)
  • Orange: Carolyn Cavecche (52)

The biggest age change was in Westminster, where Margie Rice was replaced by Tri Ta, who is 44 years younger than her.  The smallest age change (excluding Tait and Pulido, for obvious reasons) was in Garden Grove, where Bill Dalton was replaced by Bruce Broadwater, who is 5 years older than him.

While Westminster had a dramatic age decrease for mayor, Garden Grove, Irvine, and Orange all had age increases for mayor.

The Democrat median and mean ages both increased from 58 to 65.

The Republican median age decreased from 61.5 to 54 while the Republican mean age decreased from 64.5 to 53.7.

Posted in Anaheim, Garden Grove, Irvine, Orange, Santa Ana, Westminster | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Will the Santa Ana Term Limits Lawsuit Be Dismissed by the Court?

Posted by Chris Nguyen on July 11, 2012

 You may have read the post by Emami yesterday or the Voice of OC article from Monday about the lawsuit filed by Santa Ana Parks and Recreation Commissioner Max Madrid, a staffer for State Senator Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), to try to get Councilwoman Claudia Alvarez (D-Santa Ana) ruled eligible for another term despite her serving the maximum number of terms permissible under Santa Ana Charter Section 401 on the basis that when the term limit was changed from two terms to three terms was changed by Measure D in 2008 that the clock restarted for Alvarez since the measure didn’t say that terms prior to 2008 counted under Section 401.  Madrid is represented by Rancho Santa Margarita City Councilman Steve Baric, who is also Vice Chairman of the California Republican Party.

This morning, Chris Prevatt at The Liberal OC noted:

First, Madrid is not the party harmed by the determination by two legal opinions sought by the Council which are the foundation of Huizar’s statement in April that Alvarez is ineligible to serve past the end of her current third term. The only party harmed if Alvarez is denied access to nomination papers is Alvarez, not a third party like Madrid.

Looking at a copy of the suit, I suspect Prevatt is right, and the judge may dismiss the suit because Madrid indeed has insufficient standing to bring the suit.  As justification of Madrid’s standing, the suit states:

Petitioner and Plaintiff MAX MADRID (“Petitioner”) is, and at all relevant times hereto was, a resident voter and taxpayer of the City of SANTA ANA, (“City”), California.  Petitioner is currently registered to vote in the City and has paid property and/or sales taxes to the City within the past twelve months.  Plaintiff, as a municipal taxpayer seeking to avoid the waste of municipal assets, falls into the category of a type of claimant long recognized to possess a sufficiently intense interest in his claim to establish his “standing” to enter the courtroom.  Because a successful attack on wrongful municipal spending or disposition of assets in all likelihood may reduce the municipal taxpayer’s burden of meeting the expenses of government, courts do not doubt that a municipal taxpayer will effectively present his claim.  “[T]axpayers have a sufficiently personal interest in the illegal expenditure of funds by [municipal] officials to become dedicated adversaries.” (Harman v. City and County of San Francisco (1972) 7 Cal.3d 150.) In this capacity, Petitioner has standing to bring this action pursuant Code of Civil Procedure section 526(a) and case law.  Additionally, as a registered voter he has standing to challenge any implementation or application of the City Charter and ordinances.

I don’t see how preventing the City from stopping a Councilmember from running for another term prevents “the illegal expenditure of funds” by the City or “wrongful municipal spending” by Santa Ana.   The suit offers no justification for why registered voters have “standing to challenge any implementation or application of the City Charter and ordinances,” particularly since this one merely deals with the eligibility of a candidate.

California Code of Civil Procedure Section 526(a) states:

526. (a) An injunction may be granted in the following cases:
(1) When it appears by the complaint that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief demanded, and the relief, or any part hereof, consists in restraining the commission or continuance of the act complained of, either for a limited period or perpetually.
(2) When it appears by the complaint or affidavits that the commission or continuance of some act during the litigation would produce waste, or great or irreparable injury, to a party to the action.
(3) When it appears, during the litigation, that a party to the action is doing, or threatens, or is about to do, or is procuring or suffering to be done, some act in violation of the rights of another party to the action respecting the subject of the action, and tending to render the judgment ineffectual.
(4) When pecuniary compensation would not afford adequate relief.
(5) Where it would be extremely difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation which would afford adequate relief.
(6) Where the restraint is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of judicial proceedings.
(7) Where the obligation arises from a trust.

I don’t see Alvarez’s inability to run for Council as harming Madrid in any of the seven ways above.

Now, if the City Clerk did allow Alvarez to run, then a person could bring suit to stop her on the argument that they could suffer harm by having an ineligible person on the ballot, as that could a) harm their own run for Council or b) be the illegal expenditure of funds cited in Madrid’s suit.

Relief can only be granted to Alvarez.  The only person who can be harmed by preventing Alvarez from running is Alvarez.  Madrid doesn’t have standing to bring the suit, and consequently, I suspect the Court will dismiss the case because of Madrid’s insufficient standing.  If Alvarez wants to be ruled eligible to run for a fourth term, she is going to have to file suit herself, as only she has suffered enough harm to gain sufficient standing in court.

Posted in Santa Ana | Tagged: , , | 6 Comments »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,006 other followers