Photo by Gustavo ArellanoLarry “Nativo” Lopez's enemies point to his support of bilingual education, constant race-baiting and abrasive personality as the reasons more than 70 percent of Santa Ana voters decided to boot from office the six-year trustee of the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) on Feb. 4. While there's no doubt Lopez was his own worst enemy, there were other unusual factors that helped topple the longtime immigrant-rights activist:
1. RON UNZ The Palo Alto bazillionaire and anti-bilingual-education carpetbagger bankrolled the recall effort from the beginning, ultimately forking over $100,000. The county Republican Party, sniffing blood, followed Unz. Other wealthy Lopez bashers pitched in an additional $200,000. Republican Party insider Rob Richardson announced his candidacy to replace Lopez in the recall vote—and ultimately won; Republican activist Tim Whitacre supplied the organizational talent to a campaign that was Latino in name only.
Lopez—who was able to raise just over $100,000—simply couldn't match Unz and his Republican cohorts, who plastered Santa Ana with “Recall Lopez” signs in English and Spanish—in a obvious contradiction of their anti-bilingual-education rhetoric.
2. THE MEDIA Lopez consistently refused to talk to the English-language press during the recall campaign, claiming they unduly persecuted him. He was partly correct. Story after story in the Weekly, the Los Angeles Times, and The Orange County Registerskewered Lopez on issues ranging from shady financial contributions to his grandstanding Catholicism. But it was The Orange County Register, a paper with a conservative political mission, that waged the most ruthless anti-Lopez campaign. In the two weeks before the Feb. 4 vote, the Reg ran a scathing Sunday column by editorial writer and avowed Lopez hater Steven Greenhut; debuted a special section on the Register website examining Lopez's mishandling of Santa Ana school construction bonds; ran a three-page story dealing with alleged Lopez improprieties despite the fact that such charges were months old and well-reported in the Weekly; and noted with glee in nearly every story that Lopez refused to talk with Register reporters. Surprisingly, the Registerdidn't run an editorial taking a stance on the recall, but then it didn't have to: the Feb. 1 publication of a column by SAUSD superintendent Al Mijares served the purpose. 3. THE MIJARES MISSIVE The Mijares editorial revealed nothing new to Lopez haters but served to undermine any remaining credibility Lopez might have had with his traditional support base—Latino voters. “When Mijares put his cards on the table, Lopez was doomed,” said Benjamín Escobedo, an El Monte-based Democratic Party worker deeply involved in Santa Ana politics. “People now saw that his own colleague—a Latino—was blasting him. That was the nail in the coffin. That kept people from voting for Lopez.” In the opinion piece, Mijares called Lopez a “cancerous cell,” blamed his colleague for all the district's problems, and disavowed any responsibility for Santa Ana's school-construction woes. “I can no longer stand publicly silent on egregious matters which threaten the integrity and stature of the Santa Ana Unified School District,” Mijares sanctimoniously asserted. Caught off guard, Lopez broke his months-long Registersilence and responded with a lengthy letter to the editor on Feb. 3 refuting Mijares' claims. But it was too late. The Times picked up the story, and even the Times-owned Spanish-language daily La Opinión reported that Lopez's former ally now disavowed him. But none of those papers asked the obvious questions: What had kept Superintendent Mijares silent for so long? Why had Mijares suddenly found his backbone? Wasn't the letter itself evidence of Mijares' failure to serve the public interest? None of the papers, in short, called Mijares an opportunist. Or a wimp. 4. INGRATES As a voter-registration organizer, Lopez was instrumental in the elections of Loretta Sanchez and Lou Correa, yet neither took a position regarding the recall. One explanation for the snub is that the elected officials view Lopez as a troublemaker—just as quick to criticize a Democrat as a Republican who votes against immigrant interests. But a more plausible explanation comes from Escobedo, who believes the Democrats were simply afraid of taking on the Republicans behind the recall effort. At the neighborhood level, the ingratitude was worse. Each of the three Latinos on the Santa Ana City Council as well as Mayor Miguel Pulido opposed Lopez. 5. THE VOTERS—OR, RATHER, THE LACK THEREOF Even the public support of elected Latino officials still wouldn't have been enough to stave off the recall. Lopez's main power base has always been immigrants who aren't eligible to vote or recently registered Latinos. But even the voters who had kept Lopez in power since 1996 ignored the ballot boxes on Feb. 4; Lopez lost in every Santa Ana precinct—even the heavily Latino districts—and the voter turnout was a measly 21 percent. Most voters probably were in the same situation as 39-year-old factory worker Miguel Fernández. Although a registered voter who has two children in Santa Ana public schools, the Mexican native didn't vote because he “doesn't like politics.” Besides, something more important occupied his Tuesday evening: the Argentina-Mexico soccer match. “I don't know much about Lopez,” said Fernández between yells at the flaccid Mexican squad. “I know he helps out a lot of immigrants through Hermandad Mexicana Nacional. But at the same time, people say he's the main reason why schools aren't built. Vote for him, vote against him, it doesn't really matter: we'd be screwed either way.” Mexico lost 1-0. Lopez lost 8,908 to 3,706. Para leer este artículo en español, apierte aqui.
