By the Numbers
During the heated discussions on whether the denizens of the seriously blighted trailer parks were being treated fairly by the Redevelopment Agency, I found out that only one person from the two trailer parks had voted in the 2004 election. By contrast, four people from the old-age convalescent hospital, located between the two trailer parks, had managed to struggle up to the front desk in their wheelchairs and walkers to vote. To me this meant that the trailer people didn’t care about Culver City or living in Culver City. The people in the convalescent hospital did. I mean 400 percent more people voted in the convalescent home, which was not subject to the Redevelopment Agency’s interest, than in the trailer parks where the very survival of the trailer parks, the trailers, and the trailerites was at stake.
Little Good It Did
I pointed out that disparity to The Editor of this newspaper for over a year. He didn’t care. He had a cause! People in crappy old trailers being thrown out of them to improve the neighborhood and increase tax revenues to pay for essential city services? How could an old Bolshevik like The Editor resist that story? The Editor’s stirring of the pot really brought the trailer people out for the 2006 election, even now — Mayor Gary Silbiger came to talk to trailerites to hear about their concerns that Culver City might actually clear them out and replace the RV cesspool with something that not only looked nice but provided some revenue. For some reason, the Redevelopment Agency, after all this crusading journalism and crocodile tears, left the two trailer parks out of the proposed Redevelopment Agency proposals. This left the trailerites in the position of not being eligible to receive any moving or relocation benefits.
No Need to Think
It also left them languishing in the midst of the redevelopment around them. For while the Redevelopment Agency would be required by law to provide notice, input, relocation expenses and a first right-of-refusal on affordable housing, the private developer who buys the trailer parks will be able to throw trailerites out without so much as a second thought to where they may go, how they will go or what will happen to them.
With All Cads, Subtract One Heart
So in the wake of a City Council-Redevelopment Agency debate and vote, which affected the lives of the trailer people more than any other single governmental action (unless they have a son or daughter in Bush’s War), how did the trailer people vote? Did they turn out in droves to vote for now-Mayor Silbiger or against the heartless cads who sit on the Council with him? Well, yes and no. Instead of only one person voting from the two trailer parks in 2004, a total of six registered voters showed up to vote in 2006, out of 15 registered voters. Not only is that a 500 percent increase, but it also represents 30 percent of the registered trailer voters (a higher percentage than the rest of Culver City’s registered voters, who, citywide, only turned out 21.9 percent of the vote.) (The total turnout for that precinct was 13 percent.) The trailer people even managed to outvote the seniors in the convalescent hospital by 6 to 4, even though the convalescent hospital turned out a whopping 80 percent of their 5 registered voters.
I Will Bet I Lost the Bet
Because the trailers beat the convalescing seniors, I lost an election bet, and I owe The Editor lunch. But it has to be somewhere kosher where he can wear his hat inside. I bet The Editor that the seniors would outvote the trailer people in 2006, and I lost by 2 votes. But it does answer the question: How do 21.9 percent of the voters control an election? Answer: When the other 78.1 percent don’t show up.
Postscript
My thanks to Dep. City Clerk Ela Valladares and the wonderful staff of the City Clerk’s office for their help with this article.
When Steven Gourley is not counting votes or voters, he is practicing law on the theory that practice will make him good at his chosen profession.
