Last Chances to Draw County Lines
Alameda County residents have four different maps to consider to determine which Supervisors represent them.
The public has only a few more opportunities to add their thoughts to the once-in-a-decade Alameda County redistricting process.
Yesterday, the Board of Supervisors heard from individual residents and focused groups called a Community of Interest or COI on plans to redraw the lines where each of the five supervisor districts would represent. Every ten years, electoral districts throughout the US are redrawn to equalize the district populations. This process is called redistricting. It is important that each Supervisor represents about the same number of residents. Based on the 2020 US Census, Alameda County Districts need to represent an average of 336,000 residents with no district governing more than 352,800 people.
At its November 4, Redistricting Public Hearing, the Board of Supervisors reviewed three different possible map options (also called visualizations). A fourth option was developed on the request of one of the Supervisors to divide Oakland into two districts instead of the current three districts.
“The process is becoming more real and less abstract,” said Alameda County Director of Community Engagement, Casey Farmer. “One visualization could be adopted, or tweaks can be made. This process has to be done with transparency.”
While the recent death of District 3 Supervisor Wilma Chan had the potential of delaying the process in theory. However, the remaining Supervisors, David Haubert (District 1), Richard Valle (District 2), Nate Miley (District 4), and Keith Carson (District 5) are able to vote on the final visualizations, Farmer said. Additionally, Chan had supplied the board with her thoughts on redistricting in the early meetings, Farmer added.
“Supervisor Chan was vocal in her choices. She put in her initial thoughts and responded to all of the comments directed to her,” Farmer said.
Public feedback is taken live during the meetings as well as through email or comments posted on the redistricting website. The public is also invited to use a website to draw its own lines and define its own Districts. You can make your own map at Redistricting2021.acgov.org.
Many comments posted to the public site were focused on making representation more equitable.
“The starting point is to turn away from ethnic stereotyping/group identity and draw from our common humanity the best expectations and shared wisdom,” commented Pierre Bierre. “We’re moving in the right direction long-term as a County and State to prove that post-racial thinking is well established and is producing unparalleled social mobility.”
“We need to keep the Black Cultural Zone COI together to secure the black voices within this community and to make sure that they can continue to speak as one voice that represents all goals, strength, and body,” said Tracy Wilson in support of a unified District that covers all of Oakland. “Splitting us up lessens our impact, our values become skewed, and our voices undervalued as well as silenced by others who are unfamiliar with what we have come to know about our community in familiarity and shared experiences.”
Other commenters were concerned about keeping certain groupings of cities and municipalities together. Some asked if Castro Valley should be aligned more with Ashland and Cherryland or with Hayward? Should Pleasanton and Sunol be grouped with other Tri-Valley cities of Dublin and Livermore?
“Map B is my preferred configuration as it incorporates not only the Tri-Valley and Sunol into one district (District 1B), but it also puts the Tri-Cities of Fremont, Union, and Union City together (District 2B), as well as associating Castro Valley, and most of Hayward with the Ashland, Cherryland, San Lorenzo areas (District 4B),” said Billie R. Otis.
California State Assemblyman Bill Quirk who represents the 20th Assembly District, says he likes map D because it divides Hayward in a realistic manner, keeps the unincorporated areas together, and distributes supervisors fairly.
“Map D gives the three largest cities in the County two representatives. Hayward for a long time has felt that it has not had a fair distribution of county resources for health and welfare. This would give Hayward a better chance of making its case,” Quirk wrote.
The Board is expected to hold its final live discussions on November 23 and December 2 before rendering its decision. The Board will have the first reading on December 7 to adopt the final district maps and the second reading on December 14 at 12 noon.