Updated: County Redistricting Clash Continues

Update (Thursday, 1: 23 p.m.): Fourth District Supervisor Don Knabe, whose district includes Hermosa Beach, released a statement Thursday, saying:

"The Fourth District is the most vulnerable to dramatic changes. Under another alternative discussed, over 1 million residents would be shifted into or out of our district. As many of you said, that will destroy the connections and relationships we have built over decades. 

"Some of the discussion and news coverage have turned redistricting into a racial divide. But they are getting the story wrong; it’s not about race. The Fourth District is the most diverse in the County, with Whites, Latinos, Asian-Americans, African-Americans and many other minority groups.

"Under the plan I submitted on Tuesday, Latinos represent the largest population at 43 percent of our district. I have always welcomed diversity in our district and loved getting to know the many cultures we have in our communities."

--

Proposed redistricting changes were the hot topics of discussion in a Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors’ public hearing Tuesday, which lasted more than four hours.

Dozens of speakers spoke glowingly of Supervisor Don Knabe, whose Fourth District includes Hermosa Beach, while others warned of lawsuits if a second Latino-majority district is not created.

The hearing centered on a proposal brought forth by the county's Boundary Review Committee that was tasked in November with drawing new electoral district lines to reflect population changes found in .

The county's population grew by 300,000 people to 9.8 million and ideally the five county supervisorial districts would have 1.96 million residents in each district, said Curt Pedersen, chairman of the Boundary Review Committee.

Los Angeles County is the most populous county in the nation, and its population exceeds that of 42 individual states.

The committee narrowed down its options to two maps and presented the option now known as A2 to the board for its consideration.

The plan largely retains the status quo and moves 150,121 residents into different districts.

An alternative map devised by black and Hispanic interest groups, called S1, would move 3.4 million residents into different districts and create two Latino-majority districts.

The 10-member Boundary Review Committee, which consists of two representatives appointed by each supervisor, voted 6-4 to recommend the status quo map over the plan calling for a second Latino-majority district.

The Boundary Review Committee representatives appointed by supervisors Knabe, Zev Yaroslavsky and Michael D. Antonovich voted to support the status quo alignment, while the committee members appointed by Latina representative Gloria Molina and Mark Ridley-Thomas, who is black, voted for the alternative map.

Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Law School and redistricting expert, warned the supervisors during a 15-minute presentation that they risked legal action if they did not create two districts in which Latino voters would have the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.

Latinos now make up 48 percent of the county's population and Levitt warned about "packing" them into just one district.

"There's a very real concern here about meeting the obligations of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965," Levitt said. The law aims to ensure racial equality at the polls.

The county was sued after its 1980 redistricting due to gerrymandered boundaries that diluted the Latino vote, Levitt said.

A federal district court judge in that case (Garza v. County of Los Angeles) also found that the county had engaged in intentional discrimination in redistricting in 1959, 1965 and 1971.

Molina in February 1991 became the first Latina ever elected to the Board of Supervisors due in part to the Garza decision, Levitt said.

Knabe's Fourth District would be dramatically altered under the S1 option and would become a new Latino-majority district that moves away from the coast and toward the eastern San Gabriel Valley.

Under S1, Yaroslavsky would see his Third District altered, losing the eastern portion of the San Fernando Valley to Molina's central district, while picking up the southwestern port of Knabe's district along the Santa Monica Bay to the Palos Verdes Peninsula.

Knabe has introduced an amendment to the A2 option that calls for:

• moving Silver Lake into Molina's First District;
• uniting Playa del Rey and unincorporated West Whittier into his Fourth District;
• uniting unincorporated Florence/Firestone into Ridley-Thomas' Second District;
• and balancing district populations by moving Claremont into the First District and reversing A2's plans for shifting West Hills.

Knabe's supporters came out in droves to urge the board to keep him in his present district. Current and past elected officials from Knabe's hometown of Cerritos, Avalon, Rolling Hills Estates, Norwalk, Palos Verdes Estates, Manhattan Beach and El Segundo shared stories about how Knabe knew their residents, their interests and has stepped up to help solve problems.

The lone elected dissenters were state Assemblyman Tony Mendoza, who represents Cerritos, Buena Park and other areas in his 56th Assembly District, and Cudahy Mayor Josue Barrios.

"The status quo plan, A2, does not do anything for San Gabriel Valley cities because the coastal part of the district continues to dominate elections and therefore representation," Mendoza said.

Barrios said that Latinos need more fair representation.

"We are not here to protect incumbents," Barrios said. "We are here to protect the residents of the community."

A combat veteran who gave Knabe credit for helping him find work, a Spanish-speaking woman from Wilmington and representatives from interest groups that ranged from Cambodians to Native Americans also stood up for Knabe in the meeting.

The good vibes wore off during the second half of the public hearing when supporters of the S1 option addressed the board.

Tunua Thrash, a member of the African-American Redistricting Collaborative, reminded the board that numerous communities of interest were surveyed to draw the S1 map.

"Today's conversation should not be celebrating localization efforts and email blasts. Redistricting is not about intimidation, rather it is an act that promotes accountability," Thrash said. "I urge you to be accountable to all Angelenos by voting for S1, a map that provides real opportunity for real people."

She also urged the board to avoid the appearance of "incumbent protection."

Mark Rosenbaum, chief counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, reminded the board that he litigated the Garza case 20 years ago and warned of unintentional discrimination in the redistricting process.

"I hope that this community will spare a repeat of the divisiveness that resulted the last time around," Rosenbaum said. "The testimony that I've heard so far this afternoon on behalf of keeping the status quo is a carbon copy of what I heard 20 years ago. The promise of redistricting is the promise of the American dream, that our democracy was constructed to grow and become more inclusive."

The board voted unanimously to continue the public hearing on A2 on Sept. 6 at 1 p.m. A second public hearing will be held Sept. 27 in which other maps could be considered.

The board set a deadline of Aug. 16 at 5 p.m. for a supervisor to submit another map for consideration.

Earlier: 

What do you think of the proposed redistricting?