I really liked Tim Myers’ column today on ‘geographic blocs’ in the SCV from whence certain City Councilpeople draw their power (their home base if you will).
I liked it so much in fact I drew up a silly little map:
I’m sure we could add lots of groups and ‘power blocs’ to the map if we put our minds to it. Of course it’s not accurate in a strict, data-driven sense (for that I’d have to figure out a way to map City Council precinct results) but it can still be somewhat useful as a thought exercise. There’s no doubt, for instance, that Laurie Ender is strong in North Valencia and Bob Kellar is strong in Canyon Country.
It’s becoming more clear to me that as the city grows up (and out) and as our interests as residents of North Valencia, or Sand Canyon, or Canyon Country or Newhall diverge that someday, inevitably, we’ll have to move to a District-based City Council. How interesting to discuss this on the same day that the Signal reminisces over the City’s founding.
Loading ...
Who holds the Power for the area near Lyons Avenue? Is this area an orphan?
Kelly
A “power block” or nexus is defined as an area where a winning candidate polled substantially higher than their proportional margin of victory in the total at large votes.
Based on this method, in the 2008 election Laurie Ender had a power nexus in the precincts associated with the tracts of Northbridge, Northbridge Pointe, and Northpark where she received 900 MORE votes than the closest competitor,
With respect to Bob Kellar, his power nexus resided in Sand Canyon where he got 400 MORE votes than the closest competitor.
In every other precinct but five Ender and Kellar came one or two (same as the total. In five Bob Spierer or Diane Trautman eked out EXTREMELY narrow victorys with Kellar and Ender coming second or third. Maria Gutzeit finished LAST in every precinct.
This would indicate that NO other area, including the one around Lyons, had an affinity for any single candidate, but went along with the general result. (This, by the way, negates Jeff’s call for districts.)
Thanks, Tim Myers! With your understanding of this polictical process, are you experienced in politics or just an astute observer?
I for one will never vote to annex until they go to regional districts for Council seats. The at-large voting only serves to ensure the status quo.
It’s been said that diapers and elected officials must both be changed periodically… and for the same reason.
Kelly
Just an observer and an analyzer of numbers.
spineflower2
Not saying it is right or wrong, but you do realize that a district system disenfranchises the more well off. Since people with higher incomes (Meg Whitman accepted) tend to vote more a representative for a wealthier district needs to get more absolute votes to get elected than a representative from a relatively poorer district, but they both have an equal vote on the representative body.
The California Assembly and Senate are good examples. If you compared absolute votes received by the various representatives by party Democrats, though a near supermajority, actually received LESS votes in total than the elected Republicans.
The wealthy have other ways of ‘enfranchising’ themselves. That’s pretty much how this town runs.