Re “Shakeup of Black Districts Works Just the Way Wesson (Mum) Planned”
[img]1436|left|Bernard Parks||no_popup[/img]I want to remind you that the city of Los Angeles redistricting maps – first voted on two days ago – will be brought up in the City Council meeting for the final time next Wednesday. These maps have been made without consideration of our community or our history. The commissioners and most members of the City Council have continuously ignored the pleas of people who want their districts to stay pretty much the same.
Three basic legal rules need to be followed in redistricting:
1. Equal Population – The Constitution requires districts to have roughly equal population. In Los Angeles, the population of a district should be about 250,000 persons.
2. Non-discrimination – Federal law states that racial minorities should not be grouped in ways that limit their political effectiveness. Race cannot be the main reason for drawing district lines, but the lines also cannot prevent these groups from exercising the ability to elect candidates of their choice.
3. Communities of Interest – The Charter demands that the districts reflect public input about communities of interest; districts should reflect those communities of interest where possible.
Problems with the City’s Process
Districts 8, 9, and 10 are the three current Council districts in Los Angeles with African American representatives. At the start of the process, their populations were:
[img]1440|exact|||no_popup[/img]
Only Council District 10 is below the ideal population size (about 5 percent below the ideal size, or about 12,000 people).
There is no need for major shifts in this portion of the district map. For example, Council District 10 could satisfy its population deficit by shifting just about 7,000 to 10,000 people into its district lines. However, the city’s approved map (voted out on March 16) moves more than 40,000 new people into the district – many of them from my Council District 8.
There is a great misunderstanding about how the city’s proposed new map will affect the black community in Los Angeles. As mentioned earlier, three existing districts that have elected members who are African American – C.D. 8 (mine), C.D. 9 (Jan Perry), and C.D. 10 (Council President Herb Wesson). The current black citizen voting age percentages in each of these districts follow.
The first three figures are before the pending redistricting maps, the second three afterward.
[img]1441|exact|||no_popup[/img]
All three of these districts have elected black candidates quite consistently over the last few decades, but they have done so using different racial population alignments.
C.D.8 is the city’s only majority district that is African American. C.D. 9 and C.D. 10 have been effective as racial coalition districts (with blacks cooperating with other similarly sized groups to elect mutually agreeable candidates). The candidates from C.D. 9 and C.D. 10 succeed by establishing relationships among different racial/ethnic groups for electoral support.
C.D. 9 currently represents 75 percent of 39,000 total persons currently living in downtown. C.D. 14 (Jose Huizar) represents 25 percent of these persons. His district is anchored in East L.A. and northeast L.A.
The only testimony that favored shifting all of downtown to C.D. 14 came from people already living in C.D. 14 – only 25 percent of the population.
The bulk of downtown expressed satisfaction with their place in C.D. 9. Citizens in Little Tokyo (currently in C.D. 9) stated unanimously that they had long historical ties to South Los Angeles. Further, they stated that they had been quite happy with the level of representation they received from C.D. 9.
Shopowners from the garment district explained that the commercial connections in LA were north-south (following CD 9’s current lines) as opposed to east-west (which reflected the commission’s proposed drawing).
The Commission and Council were presented with a map that shows that C.D. 14’s population needs can be satisfied by growing in the northeast neighborhoods like Glassell Park, Eagle Rock, and Highland Park.
The city drew C.D. 14 and C.D. 1 with smaller Latino majorities in order to move downtown out of CD 9.
The city has transformed C.D. 9 from an effective racial coalition district (with Asian, black and Latino voters working together) into a Latino majority district. The result is a district with fewer opportunities of effective alliances and substantially fewer commercial assets.
Crenshaw Area
My Council District is the city’s only majority black district (based on citizen voting age population). Its black population is currently 60 percent, and is only slightly over the ideal population.
Importantly, the African American population in C.D. 8 is less than a majority of all persons in the district (citizens and non-citizens). Latinos outnumber African Americans, but their share of the citizen population is currently smaller.
C.D. 10 takes approximately 16,000 people (more than twice what is needed) from C.D. 8, leaving C.D. 8 significantly below the ideal population (about 2.5 percent).
C.D. 10 also removes more than a majority of its existing white voter population from the district.
Significantly, the neighborhoods taken out of my district are concentrated with higher-income African American neighborhoods and the Crenshaw Mall.
Testimony from this community from C.D. 8 largely stated satisfaction with the existing configuration. They requested only that the Commission make minor alterations to the map.
Despite their starting points, these changes result in making Mr. Wesson’s C.D.10 overpopulated and my district (the only black majority district) underpopulated.
To enact the C.D. 10 changes, the Commission ignored the unanimous testimony from Koreatown to be kept together as a community and located in C.D. 13. Instead, CD 10 divides Koreatown.
As a result, CD 10 dismantled its effective coalition district with whites, blacks and Latinos. It captured a divided Asian American community that wished to be kept together. And it targeted black voters from CD 8 to leave that district with a numerically WEAKER black population with fewer economic resources.
The redistricting process is crucial to the future of our community. The process has brought unrest, controversy and confusion, and we need your continued support to make sure these unfair maps do not get passed.
This proposal is now in its third and final phase, before becoming law. It is now up to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to either sign – thus approving – this plan to dismantle South LA or stand up for what is right, and veto it.
Click here to see map of the current CD8.
Click here to see map of post-redistricting C.D. 8.
I need you to attend the Council meeting on Wednesday and stand up for your neighborhood and for South L.A. We need to show the other 13 Council members that South L.A. is united and determined to fight this injustice.
I urge you to call, write or email Mayor Villaraigosa and demand he veto this proposal!
Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa:
200 N. Spring St.
Room 303
Los Angeles, CA 90012
213-978-0600
mayor@lacity.org
I will continue to stand with you and stand with my colleague, Councilmember Jan Perry, and fight this grave injustice with every tool at my disposal. If the Mayor approves this plan, we are prepared to file a lawsuit, challenging the legality of the new districts, due to violations of the United States Constitution, the Federal Voting Rights Act, and the City Charter.
Make sure you stay up to date with all the latest developments on my webpage www.bernardparks.com or twitter @BernardCParks and on Facebook at Facebook.com/CouncilmemberParks and Facebook.com/BernardCParks.
