It was just as bad as expected. The voter turnout for the Los Angeles' May 21 election was 23.3 percent, the lowest in 100 years for a general election.
Councilman Eric Garcetti was elected mayor with 222,300 votes, which is less than any other non-incumbent mayor elected since the 1930s, according to a Los Angeles Times analysis. The numbers also represent just a little over 5 percent of the population of Los Angeles. The low enthusiasm has been blamed on the similarities between the candidates -- both Democrats supported by unions.
The election was also the most expensive Southland election season on record. Independent expenditure committees and candidates in city and LAUSD races racked up almost $54 million in expenses, according to Ethics Commission figures.
The previous record was set in 2001 by James Hahn and Antonio Villaraigosa. Candidates and outside groups at that time ran up $44.9 million in expenses, and voter turnout during the runoff was 37.67 percent .
There is a concerted effort underway to toss out the majority of the city of San Bernardino's elected officials. The recall is targeted at the mayor, the city attorney, and all seven members of the city council. This is significant if only for the sheer number of elected officials that recall proponents are seeking to toss out of office.
I discussed this issue during a live chat hosted by the Los Angeles News Group.
A ballot measure cleared to appear in the next election will ask Angelenos if the city should create its own public health department, a service currently contracted out to the county. The group behind it is argues that the county agency is too big and inefficient.
"Part of our reason for spearheading this ballot initiative was to open up a frank public conversation about the shortcomings of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health: a calcified institution layered with too much bureaucracy that gives short shrift to city residents," said Michael Weinstein, president of AIDS Healthcare Foundation, in a statement.
State Senator Ron Calderon (D - Montebello) has apparently found himself the target of an FBI investigation. In a rare move earlier this month, the federal agency searched his offices pursuant to a sealed search warrant.
Much has been written about Calderon in the week since the search, a good deal of it focused on dealings involving him and his brother, Tom Calderon, a former state assemblyman turned high-priced lobbyist. But in another twist in this ongoing tale, we are now hearing about another Calderon brother, who also happens to be a former state legislator.
It has now been reported that Sen. Calderon and his brother Charles Calderon used campaign funds to pay for their "holiday gifts." According to disclosure reports in 2009 Sen. Calderon used campaign funds to give Charles a $182.70 pair of shoes, and a few days later Charles Calderon used campaign funds to give Ron Calderon a $400 "holiday gift card." The next year, in 2010, Charles Calderon's campaign account gave Ron Calderon a $420 "holiday gift." Why $420? Well, in 2010, that was the limit on gifts to lawmakers.
The Los Angeles City Council today approved setting up an account to take donations to cover Mayor-elect Eric Garcetti's transition costs until Sept 30.
Garcetti can solicit up to $250,000 in gifts, and each donor can give a maximum of $10,000. Any money that goes unspent will be absorbed into the city's general fund, which pays for city services and operation costs.
It is estimated that over $50 million was spent on the May 21, 2013 Los Angeles City elections. Approximately 20 percent of registered voters, or 400,000 people, cast a ballot, meaning that more than $100 was spent on each voter. This should be a staggering amount.
People often ask me if money spent on behalf of losing candidates or losing ballot measures makes a difference. There is a common misconception that money spent to support candidates or ballot measures that were unsuccessful is merely wasted. I disagree.