A break from the election grind

The threat -- or promise -- of a special election to fill former

Mayor Karen Robinson’s seat on the Costa Mesa City Council has

finally faded. Now what looms is the November 2004 council election,

in which three of the five council seats will be up for grabs.

The dynamic then will be much different than what council hopefuls

and their most ardent supporters were planning for the avoided

special election, which likely would have happened this November.

An election this year would have hinged on a relatively few number

of votes, as is historically true of special elections (or even

off-presidential year elections). Groups that have reliable core

voters tend to do well in such races. And in Costa Mesa, the most

obvious group that fits that description is the loosely organized

“improver” movement.

It’s a safe bet that Eric Bever, had he been the improver

candidate, would have won the election. In the past two elections,

after all, an improver candidate has won a seat: first Chris Steel in

2000, then Allan Mansoor in 2002.

At this point, Bever remains a front-runner in 2004, but his

chances are significantly lower in a race that is unlikely to play as

the elections did in 2000 and 2002.

The central reason for this is that, for the first time, the

improvers won’t have a single candidate they can coalesce behind.

In 2000, the improver candidate was Steel. (Planning Commissioner

Joel Faris, who also ran that year and did well, coming in fifth out

of 11 candidates as an unknown, did not yet have the improver name as

clearly as he does now.)

This election marked the improvers “coming out” as an organized

resident group. All of their efforts could be directed for Steel,

whose name recognition from repeated runs and plum placement on the

ballot likely helped boost him to the top of the race, as did the

size of the field.

In 2002, Mansoor was the improver candidate, able to run unopposed

for their votes (Faris did not run, in part to avoid diluting the

improver field). That unified backing was in contrast to -- and not

everyone agrees with this idea -- the splitting of votes between

former Mayor Linda Dixon and Planning Commissioner Katrina Foley.

Next year, however, Steel is up for reelection. So if the

improvers want to add another new face without losing one of their

councilmen (and just how much they support Steel is up for debate),

they will have to figure out a way to get him reelected, and Bever,

if he is their candidate, elected. Their resources, in such a

scenario, will be spread thinner.

The improvement movement also does not have the element of

surprise any longer. In 2000, few outside the improver camp thought

Steel, who’d been running for 20 years, had a serious chance of

winning. In 2002, Mansoor also seemed a long shot. But after those

two victories, there is no way other candidates will be dismissing

the improver standard bearer.

A final key will be whether other loosely affiliated candidates

take a page out of the improver handbook and decide not to run

against each other. But with one open seat -- Councilwoman Libby

Cowan being termed out, although even that point seems to be in

dispute, at times, proving the lack of clarity in election law -- and

another being occupied by someone, Mike Scheafer, who has not won a

citywide election, it is hard to imagine everyone putting egos aside.

Stranger things have happened.

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He can be reached at (949)

574-4233 or by e-mail at [email protected].