We did not prevail this time. Everyone involved in the “NO on AA” campaign worked exceptionally hard against an entrenched machine that engaged in deception, distortion and fabrication. Add to that AA’s promoters had to spend about half a million dollars, or about $200 for each of their 24,000 “yes” votes. They took that money from developers outside of Santa Monica. They also funneled funds to their PAC that had originally been contributed by people from outside Santa Monica to foundations and tax exempt organizations like KCRW, the SMC Foundation and the Associated Students.
All things considered, they cannot be very pleased with their limited effect of getting just 62% of the vote. Although that is better than they did in 2004, it is far below their 70% win in 2002 when they spent considerably less money and far less political capital.
To borrow from Hillary Clinton: The “NO on AA” voters made 15,000 cracks in a political machine that called in every favor it was due or could borrow, and took every penny it could get, much of it from people it once called the enemy.
Santa Monica voters will have the opportunity to work again to bring some rationality to education funding for Santa Monica’s children, and also to the governance of Santa Monica. With each election we gain more ability and experience and a greater number of organized, committed supporters. As blocs of voters learn that the gifted and dedicated political leaders they once trusted with the governance of Santa Monica have now become the privileged special interest they once opposed, those voters will begin to make more informed choices, and historically it will happen suddenly rather than gradually.
Phil Hendricks
Bond Fatigue Committee 2008