[Editor’s Note: Historically, the five County Supervisors jealously guard their districts. Supervisor Yaroslavsky is furious this afternoon over the remapping plans designed and submitted earlier this week by colleagues Mark Ridley-Thomas and Gloria Molina, intended to increase Latino voices. This essay appeared today on his blog, http://zev.lacounty.gov/ ]
As a member of the Board of Supervisors since 1994, I’ve had the privilege and responsibility of representing nearly 2 million people woven together in a district that encompasses the Westside, the San Fernando Valley and the Las Virgenes region—all in the virtual shadow of the Santa Monica Mountains.
The residents of the Third District share more than a cohesive geography. Although ethnically diverse, they share common government services, transportation, environmental interests and much more.
Now, all this is being placed in serious jeopardy by a bald-faced gerrymander that is completely unnecessary. Proponents claim it’s needed to comply with the law, but that just isn’t so. In fact, this proposal turns federal law on its head by ignoring changing voting patterns in our increasingly diverse county.
Like the state and federal governments, counties must redraw their district boundaries every ten years to conform to the results of the U.S. Census. But unlike the recently completed state and federal efforts, which were performed by citizens’ panels, the county’s redistricting must be decided by the Board of Supervisors.
As part of this process, two proposed maps (denoted as S2 and T1) were submitted this week that would radically redraw the Board of Supervisors’ district boundaries, leaving communities fragmented and an estimated 3.5 million people suddenly represented by a supervisor for whom they never cast a vote. Worse, some of these same people would be denied the right to vote for a supervisor for as long as six years because of the timing of elections.
The scope of the fallout would be vast and swift, potentially undermining the ability of communities to speak with one voice as advocates for their common interests. For example, the San Fernando Valley, which has fought hard to maintain its own identity, would be carved into three different districts. Hollywood and mid-Wilshire, meanwhile, could be included in a district with such distant cities as Lomita and Cerritos.
As you know, I’m currently in my final term as a supervisor so I have no personal political interest in the electoral composition of the districts—even if it means that, for my term’s duration, I would no longer represent communities I’ve been honored to serve for nearly two decades. I’m reaching out to you because I’m utterly convinced that these redistricting schemes would significantly injure our ability to fight together to improve transportation in our communities, provide continuity on development issues, extend healthcare to our underserved population and protect the environment of the Santa Monica Mountains and the north Santa Monica Bay.
The County’s redistricting plan must adhere to the Federal Voting Rights Act, which protects the rights of designated minorities to an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing. Both of the proposed maps create two districts in which Latinos would comprise more than half the voting-age citizens, instead of one such district now. Let me be clear: I strongly support the Voting Rights Act as a bulwark of the civil rights movement in our country and a guarantor of democracy for all Americans.
My Opponents Are Wrong
But contrary to the arguments put forward by supporters of the proposed maps, their adoption is not required by this law. The Voting Rights Act requires an equal opportunity for minority groups; it does not require the creation of districts in which a single minority group comprises more than 50 percent of the voting age citizenry. The federal courts have ruled that “fifty percent” districts are only required when voting is so racially polarized that non-minorities consistently vote against minority-preferred candidates to such an extent that those candidates are denied an equal opportunity to win.
Frankly, the notion that non-minorities won’t vote for a minority candidate in L.A. County is antiquated. Los Angeles in 2011 is not the same as the Los Angeles of forty, thirty or even twenty years ago. Our county is politically and socially far more mature and broadminded. In the last decade, many elections have been won by Latino and African-American candidates, even where those groups did not represent a majority of the voters, including Mayor Villaraigosa, Sheriff Baca and County Assessor John Noguez.
I strongly believe that it is possible to redistrict this county in a manner that protects the voting rights of minorities without dismembering established communities of interest, without shifting nearly 40 percent of our population from one district to another, and without relying on antiquated assumptions about the voting behavior of different ethnic groups. The federal courts have given us the roadmap to get this done and have consistently rejected efforts to use the Voting Rights Act in the way proposed by backers of these new plans.
The Board of Supervisors will hold a hearing on the proposed redistricting plans on Tuesday, Sept. 6, 1 o’clock, Room 381 of the downtown Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration, 500 W. Temple St.
I urge you to attend and make your voice heard on this crucial issue for our community. If you’re unable to attend, I ask that you communicate your concerns to the board members by writing or e-mailing commserv@bos.lacounty.gov.
Mr. Yaroslavsky may be contacted at http://zev.lacounty.gov/blog/seriously-crossing-the-line
