On March 8, California held a special election to fill the vacant Assembly seat, 4th district. Seven Republicans and one Democrat ran. No one got 50%, so there will be a run-off. The results are: Democrat Dennis Campanale 31.8%, and these results for each of the seven Republicans: Beth Gaines 22.5%, John Allard 21.5%, Cheryl Bly-Chester 9.7%, Michael O’Connor 5.7%, Matt Williams 3.8%, Rob Matthews 3.8%, Bo Ambrozewicz 1.2%. These results are not final and it is conceivable that when they are final, Allard will qualify for the run-off instead of Gaines.
This is the third special legislative election in California since the “top-two” system took effect. Under the old law, special elections were conducted under blanket primary rules. So far, in each of the three special elections under “top-two”, the new system has made no difference in the outcome. Under the old rules, no second round was held in a special election if someone got at least 50% in the first round, and someone did get at least 50% in each of the first two elections. In the recent 4th Assembly race, there will be a second round, but the same people who would have qualified for the second round under the old rules are the same two people who will be in it under the new rules.
The second round will have write-in space on the ballot, but no write-ins will be counted in the second round, even if someone files as a declared write-in candidate. Under the old rules, write-ins would have been counted in the second round.
Richard Winger
Thank you for the update on the election for the 4th Assembly district. I noticed that the entire Republican
field did not object to the way there party preference
was listed on the Ballot by the four counties conducting
the election. None of those county complied with CCROV # 11005 of January 26, 2011.
They listed for the Republicans “My party preference is
the Republican Party”. Yet that is not the official
name of the party in the California Elections Code.
These 4 county ballots should of stated “My party preference is the California Republican Party”.
Yesterday, the Census numbers for California came out.
Since I am now a student in GIS, I have started to play
with the redistricting numbers.
Lets hope the redistricting commission does better with its job that the legislature or the courts in the
past.
Lets not overlook the fact that Siskiyou County has the
most Northern point in the State of California (since they did a poor survey of the Northern border in the
19th century). Because of that all districts # 1 should
include the County of Siskiyou, CA. That would include
the Assembly, Senate, Congressional,and Board of Equalization.
Next the population of Los Angeles County on April 1,
2010 stood at 9,818,605. The City of Los Angeles was
3,792,621. San Diego County was 3,095,313. Orange
County was 3,010,232. Riverside County was 2,189,641.
San Bernardino County 2,035,210.
With the above numbers and a good program one can divide
up the state using all the “Flag Poles” and “Chess Boards one wants. A flag pole can be seen by looking
at a map of the City of Santa Barbara. A Chess Board
can be seen by looking at Indian lands in the City of Palm Springs. The Flag Poles can even go under the
Pacific Ocean, but everything most be connected. Just
look at connecting the City of Avalon and you will
understand about under the Pacific Ocean. For the
San Francisco Bay Area the Golden Gate Bridge will be
connection San Francisco with Marin County for all of
the districts. This is because the border between San
Mateo and San Francisco would have to be used if the
redistricting remains legal.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg
Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
Richard Winger
You should correct and state 50% plus one and not just
50%.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party.
Richard Winger
The reason for the violation of CCROV #11005 as note in
post #1 is a reading of California Elections Code, Division 7, Part 3, Chapter 1, Section 7250 states: “This part shall apply to the organization, operation, and function of that political party known as the California Republican Party.”
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American
Independent Party.
Richard Winger
I just noticed I left of in post #1 the total population of Imperial County which is 174,528. One would need that to figure the 4th Board of Equalization
District and the Assembly and Senate District that
Imperial County will fall in after the Redistricting
Commission does their job.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American
Independent Party
P.R. and App.V
Candidate/incumbent rank order lists for replacements in legislative body vacancies.
NO moron special elections needed — with very expensive per vote costs.
Richard Winger
Using the GIS studies I already learned, Los Angeles County will have 21 Assembly Districts totally within
its county. This also means that over half of the
California States Population fits in the five most Southern counties in the state. That also means that
the 4th Board of Equalization District will include
San Diego, Imperial, Riverside, Orange, and part of
Los Angeles County only. San Bernadino County will
be in the 2nd Board of Equilation District.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg
Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
Thanks, Mark, for your interesting posts about the new California census data and also the official name of the Republican Party in California. As to the point about “50%” should say “50% plus one”, I think most people understand “50%” to mean that. Technically even one vote isn’t needed beyond 50%; it could be done with one-half of a vote. In other words, if 301 votes are cast, no second round is held if someone gets 151 votes, even though 151 votes is only a half-vote more than 50%.
Richard Winger
Thank you for the reply. I believe the term majority is
more than 50%, but that is not what Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State believes. She believes
that it is 50% plus one additional voter. See CCROV #11005.
The City of Los Angeles will have four whole Senatorial
Districts of the 10 Senatoral Districts in the 3rd Board
of Equalizaion District. The Cities of Beverly Hills and West Hollywood will have flag poles or chest boards connecting them to the City of Santa Monica to form part of another Senatoral District.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg
Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
Richard Winger
As to the make up of the 4th Board of Equalization District. Both San Diego and Orange Counties will have
three senatoral districts totally within those counties
and Riverside County will have two senatoral districts
totally within Riverside County.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg
Vice Chairman, American Independent Party.
Richard Winger
Now to the County of Sacramento. It will have two
Congressional Districts totally with that county.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
Richard Winger
I noted my first Assembyman to loss his seat by redistricting. His name is V. Manuel Perez, Because Imperial County’s population on 174,528 will attach to
291,146 or 291,147 of the remainded population in San Diego County not included in any of the three new Senatoral Districts totally within San Diego County.
The new 80th Assembly district will not include any
of Riverside County.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
American Independent Party
50% is enough when it comes to a runoff. Even if there are only two candidates, either there’s a tie (forcing a runoff) or one of them won by just one vote greater than 50%. And if there are more than two candidates, the one who receives 50% beat the others.
As to the other arguments and trivia, this is a classic case of being technically accurate without having any effect on the results. If anyone thinks an election result will get tossed out because the ballots say “Republican Party” instead of “California Republican Party,” well keep dreaming. Only the fringe will care, but the rest of the world moves on without any interest.
Why does the Secretary of State group the candidates by party preference in the results?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to either list them by vote percentage or alphabetically by name without regard to party?
This is the first election under the Top 2 Open Primary reform in which the election calendar showed deadlines for party endorsements, but it does not appear that any parties made endorsement. Since the law requires the opportunity for endorsement in any election for a voter-nominated office, will any of the 6 qualified parties make endorsement for the runoff?
Turnout is at least 21.5%. So it appears that the results from Los Angeles were because they were from LA, and not because of the Top 2 Open Primary, plus the fact that this was a more competitive election.
Jim Riley
Until Secretary of State Bowen issued CCROV 11005 the issue was unclear to me which committee within the American Independent Party of California makes the endorsements. All
I knew is the endorsement were free of charge.
I was thinking to test out the process by having the Kern
County AIP make an endorsement in the Special Election in the
17th Senate District for Kern County only. But changed my
mind when I could not find a person that would change their
legal name to “None Of The Others”, viz., N. O. T. Others.
Only one person voted in that Special Election in Kern County
and that went to the GOP.
The plan to place the 3rd Board of Equalization District in
Los Angeles County will be the most interesting part of the
job of the Redistricting Commission. That is because of keeping three of the 10 Senatorial Districts totally within
the City of Los Angeles. They will have to use both chess
board blocks and flag poles to complete that task, because
the cities of West Hollywood and Beverly Hills will be linked together and somehow connected to the City of Santa Monica
to form part of a different Assembly District from the territory around them. There will also need a connection
of the City of San Fernando with unincorporated areas of
the County of Los Angeles to its North. Plus that the
will need to connect unincorporated area of the County of
Los Angeles surrounded by the territory of the City of
Los Angeles. The task will mean the dividing of census blocks
like they did when the place 8 now down to 5 electors into
Kern County from a Los Angeles County Census Block.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party.
#15 Thank you for the CCROV number. I hadn’t realized that these were online.
Regarding the party endorsement, since the sample ballots are produced by the individual counties it appears that individual county parties could make their own and possibly conflicting endorsements. I’m sure that a State party can regulate the process of making an endorsement.
When a political party makes a contribution letter to be inserted into the voter’s pamphlet, who is responsible for producing that? Is it each county party?
CCROV 11005 says that the SOS has produced an updated Declaration of Candidacy form which has a place for the candidate to indicate their party registration history for the previous 10 years. Have you seen an updated declaration of candidacy?
My understanding of the intent of this section is so that voters can see if a candidate has just recently changed his party registration (I think this happened in the AD4 election). Rather than regulating party affiliation changes as was done in the past, California now relies on disclosure.
Under the statute, the responsibility for the information on the SOS website rests with the Secretary of State, and not the individual candidates. The information on the declaration of candidacy form is presumably to help the SOS, since the statewide voter registration database is new. In the case of Michael Chamness and the SD 28 special election it did not include his previous affiliation with the Green Party. He would have filed before Januarty 26th, so perhaps there was just some misunderstanding on the part of Dean Logan or Chamness and not an attempt to deceive.
CCROV 10086 (3/9/2010) makes it quite clear that there is a distinction between voters affiliated with non-qualified parties and Declined To State (No Party Preference) voters.
CCROV 10273 (8/30/2010) regarding the voter registration voter makes it clear that the classification of Miscellaneous voters include those voters who are affiliated with non-qualified parties, regardless whether the party is making a current attempt to qualify or not. Gautam Dutta is the one who is mixed up about the Miscellaneous classification. The word miscellaneous simply means a mixture or assortment, in this case of political party affiliations that are not disaggregated by party – though in the case of the voter registration report, the number of voters registered with parties attempting to qualify is also separately itemized.
#15+ The census shows a continued eastward shift of the population into both Central Valley and the Inland Empire, and perhaps a slight northward movement. The southernmost congressional district in Kern County now needs 80,000 voters further south. It may be possible to get this from San Bernardino going into places like Barstow and Twentynine Palms, and avoiding places like Lancaster, Palmdale, and Apple Springs.
I don’t know if there is enough population in northern LA in Lancaster, Palmdale, and Santa Clarita for a congressional district, or whether it will have to come south into the San Ferndando Valley. You might be able to go east into places like Apple Springs that are north of the mountains.
Pingback: Hot news for: map of california | : Daily Hot News - Daily hot world news by AutoSkt.com