Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

BART Director Debora Allen announces candidacy for District 4 Contra Costa County Supervisor 2022

By 4 Comments

Deborah Allen

BART Director Debora Allen, a long-time advocate for improved public safety and a common-sense approach to government spending, today announced her candidacy for Contra Costa Supervisor District 4.

“I’m excited to take this important step in my fight to improve the quality of life of all Contra Costa residents,” said Allen, a 35-year Contra Costa resident. “I believe my close scrutiny of government spending, my background as a business owner and my experience fighting for fiscal transparency and stability for the region’s largest transportation agency make me uniquely qualified to serve as county supervisor. I’m looking forward to the upcoming campaign and the June primary.”

Allen was first elected as Board Director for BART District 1 in 2016 and easily won re-election in 2020, besting her nearest opponent by 75,000 votes. Her willingness to stand up for suburban taxpayers and fight for quality-of-life improvements for transit riders – including station hardening, a ban on panhandling, and tougher crime and fare evasion enforcement – often put her at odds with the urban city-backed majority on the board.

Allen was instrumental in the creation and development of the Office of BART Inspector General and serves as the first Chair of the Standing BART Audit Committee, important steps in eliminating wasteful spending practices at the transportation agency.

If elected supervisor, she would bring that same tenacity, accountability and common-sense approach to government spending to the county board. Allen says that as supervisor her priorities would include public safety, regional transportation issues, improved mental health services and the efficient use of taxpayer money. Though a supporter of new housing, she would also fight to bring new jobs to the county in order to improve the overall jobs-housing balance.

“Building new housing alone won’t solve the issues facing working-class families and average county taxpayers,” Allen said. “We need to fund effective and successful mental health programs, bring in new jobs and improve our transportation network in a coordinated approach that addresses the quality of life for all residents. We must also address why the cost of new housing construction is so unaffordable and take steps to reduce the burden placed on small businesses to fund basic services.”

Allen, a Clayton resident, spent 30 years in financial management as a CPA, tax manager, CFO and business owner. Prior to her time on the BART board, she served six years on the Contra Costa employees’ pension board, where she fought for reforms in the public pension system.

Allen currently serves on several transportation-related boards and regional commissions, including Capitol Corridor JPA, Innovate 680 and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

Allen is seeking the District 4 supervisor seat being vacated by Karen Mitchoff, who served three terms. District 4 covers Concord, much of Walnut Creek, Pleasant Hill, Clayton and unincorporated areas around Mount Diablo. CCCBOS 2021 District Map

For more information about Debora Allen for Contra Costa County Supervisor visit DeboraAllen.com.

 

Letters: Attorney reveals Contra Costa Democrats supported defunding police, sheriff’s office last year

By Leave a Comment

Former Central Committee member claims he was kicked out for voting against resolutions

“It is crucial to reallocate funds from police and sheriff departments” – approved CCC Democratic Party resolution

Segments of the Contra Costa County Democratic Party July 31, 2020 letter to the Board of Supervisors. Source: Jason Bezis

Dear Editor:

Please see the PDF attachment, which I received from the County of Contra Costa this morning in response to a Public Records Act/Better Government Ordinance request. CCCDP – Alegria Communications (12.6.21 Response)

This is the Contra Costa County Democratic Party’s local homage to the national “Defund the Police” movement:

(1) In the July 31, 2020 County Democratic Party letter to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors: “What is needed is an unprecedented and urgent redirection of funds from law enforcement …  It is crucial to reallocate funds from police and sheriff departments …”

[The earlier version that the County Democratic Central Committee passed called for “divestment.”  After I protested use of the word “divestment”, due to its very strong connotation in connection with 1980s “divestment” from the South Africa apartheid regime, County Party leaders softened it with the language above.]

(2)  July 2020 Contra Costa County Democratic Party resolution: “Shift Funding from Police and Sheriff Departments to Community Services … Therefore, be it resolved that we, the Democratic Party of Contra Costa County, encourage city councils to decrease police department funding and that County Boards of Supervisors decrease Sheriff Department funding, and instead shift these funds …”

I voted “no” on both actions.  The County Democratic Party retaliated by kicking me out of their organization (as the Contra Costa Herald already has reported, in part, in April of 2021).

The Contra Costa County Democratic Party buffoons who approved this resolution and letter enabled the recent horrifying robbery at Broadway Plaza in Walnut Creek and similar criminal conspiracies at Stoneridge Mall in Pleasanton, Southland Mall in Hayward, and at Union Square in San Francisco.

DPCCC 2020 endorsement promos for Kevin Wilk and Cindy Darling. Provided by Jason Bezis

Walnut Creek Mayor Kevin Wilk and Councilmember Cindy Darling sought and secured endorsements for their 2020 re-election campaigns from the County Democratic Party at the same time all of these “Shift Funds from Police” actions were taken by the County Democratic Party. The “Herald” should ask Wilk and Silva to publicly disclose their answers to Democratic Party written questionnaires in 2020, especially about any police funding questions.  Were they asked about police funding in oral interviews? (Police funding/oversight was a major issue in Walnut Creek in 2020 with the “Justice for Miles Hall” movement.) CADEM2020 Slate Cards – WalnutCreek

The “Herald” also ought to ask Sheriff Livingston and his announced opponent(s) about what they think of the July 2020 Democratic Party letter and resolution about police and sheriff funding.  I expect that candidates might make themselves unavailable for public comment. The District 4 Supervisorial District candidates (Birsan, Obringer, and ???) also should be asked whether or not they supported this resolution and letter, both then in 2020 and now in 2021 after the nationally notorious crime wave that struck Broadway Plaza.  Birsan now is on the Cal. Dem. Party Executive Board. Again, watch for candidates to be unavailable for public comment.

The PDF attachment is a public record.

Best regards,

Jason Bezis

Lafayette, Calif.

CC Community College Board proposed redistricting map keeps wards gerrymandered protecting incumbents

By 2 Comments

COE refers to County Office of Education and indicates the residence location of a county Board of Education Trustee. Source: 4CD. Additional city and community information added by the Herald.

Will hold their only public hearing on Wed., Dec. 8; staff’s one map makes few changes to wards, keeps six cities split, splits two more including Clayton, violates community of interest and compactness guidelines

By Allen Payton

The Contra Costa Community College District (4CD) will hold a public hearing at the December 8, 2021, Governing Board meeting to seek community input on a staff proposal to adjust trustee area boundaries and ensure population balance that keeps the wards gerrymandered with few changes to the politically drawn 2011 map. The regular meeting begins at 6:00 p.m., and will include a review of the proposed ward map based on population changes unveiled in the 2020 Census. (See related article)

The current trustee ward boundary map approved in 2011, was drawn to benefit the late Trustee Sheila Grilli, who represented Ward 3, and include Bay Point, where former Trustee Greg Enholm lives, in a separate district, so he couldn’t run against her, again. He was elected to the board the following year. The current map also benefited the late Trustee John Nejedly, who represented Ward 4, by including most of San Ramon with the more politically conservative portions of Antioch and Brentwood in East County.

It also combined the southern portions of Pittsburg with Concord, rather than use the hills as a natural boundary. It also splits Alamo from the rest of the San Ramon Valley, and includes Lamorinda with portions of Martinez and Hercules, as well as Rodeo and Crockett, again, not using the hills as a natural boundary. The trustee representing that ward must travel outside of their ward to get to the other sections. Such politically based drawing of representative district maps is referred to as gerrymandering.

Both the current and proposed maps violate two basic principles for drawing district or ward boundary maps including keeping communities of interest together and compactness. That’s in spite of the fact Board president Andy Li recently wrote “4CD is following a process to re-draw ward boundaries to ensure population balance and proportion as stipulated in Education Code. Other considerations presented and discussed at the Governing Board’s November 10, 2021, meeting, included ensuring compliance with the federal voter rights act, compact and contiguous areas, respecting communities of interest as much as possible, and respecting incumbency.”

However, respecting incumbency is not one of the guidelines in the state education code and is not a requirement for redrawing boundary maps. It’s a political consideration. For example, the Antioch School Board drew their area boundary map in 2019 resulting in two incumbents residing in the same district. The same can occur with the new college board ward map.

Proposed Trustee Wards Map

While the proposed trustee ward map has a total population deviation of just 1.7% between wards – which is closer to the intent of the Constitution of ensuring one-person-one-vote than the new map recently approved by the Board of Supervisors with a 9.77% population deviation between districts – it keeps things pretty much the same as the 2011 map. It continues to split Antioch, Brentwood, Pittsburg in East County, Martinez, Concord, Walnut Creek and one of the county’s smallest cities, Clayton, in Central County, and in West County, instead of splitting Pinole, as the current map does, the proposed map splits Hercules.

The proposed map indicates where the incumbents currently live, labeled as W’s and shows both Ward 2 Trustee and Board Vice President Judy Walters and Ward 3 Trustee Rebecca Barrett both live in Martinez.

The proposed map also indicates where the county Board of Education (labeled with A’s and COE for County Office of Education) trustees live, because that board normally uses the same map that the college board approves.

Source: 4CD

Incorrect List of Ward Member Cities and Communities for Both Maps

The staff report includes a list of cities and unincorporated communities associated with each ward for both maps. But it is incorrect. The correct information is as follows:

Ward 1 John E. Márquez 2011: El Cerrito, El Sobrante, Kensington, Richmond, San Pablo, parts of Pinole

2021: El Cerrito, El Sobrante, Kensington, Pinole, Richmond, San Pablo, and parts of Hercules

Ward 2 Judy E. Walters 2011: Alamo, Canyon, Crockett, Hercules, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Port Costa, Rodeo, parts of Pinole, parts of Pleasant Hill and parts of Walnut Creek

2021: Alamo, Canyon, Crockett, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Port Costa, Rodeo, parts of Clayton, parts of Hercules, parts of Pleasant Hill and parts of Walnut Creek

Ward 3 Rebecca Barrett 2011: Pacheco, parts of Bay Point, parts of Concord, parts of Martinez and parts of Pleasant Hill

2021: Pacheco, parts of Clayton, parts of Concord, parts of Martinez, parts of Pittsburg and parts of Pleasant Hill

Ward 4 Andy Li 2011: Blackhawk, Byron, Danville, Discovery Bay, San Ramon, Camino Tassajara, and parts of Antioch, parts of Brentwood and parts of Clayton

2021: Blackhawk, Byron, Danville, Discovery Bay, San Ramon, Camino Tassajara, parts of Antioch and parts of Brentwood

Ward 5 Fernando Sandoval 2011: Bay Point, Bethel Island, Clyde, Knightsen, Oakley, parts of Antioch, parts of Brentwood and parts of Pittsburg

2021: Bay Point, Bethel Island, Clyde, Knightsen, Oakley, parts of Antioch, parts of Brentwood and parts of Pittsburg.

Public Hearing In-Person and Online

The community is invited to participate in this conversation by either attending the meeting in-person at 500 Court Street, Second Floor Board Room, Martinez, California, or by joining the meeting via Zoom. A link to the public meeting is located on the 4CD website at www.4cd.edu in the December 8, 2021, Governing Board meeting agenda.

Special districts like 4CD are legally obligated to follow Education Code Section 5019.5, which highlights the process to follow, ensuring the population of trustee wards is balanced based on the changing demographics of the community. Community college districts are required to complete this process by February 28, 2022.

The first phase of this work began at the Governing Board’s November 10, 2021, meeting, when trustees received a presentation that outlined the demographic changes of Contra Costa County highlighted in the 2020 Census. Under the direction of legal counsel, 4CD research staff analyzed the 2020 Census information to develop the proposed ward map.

4CD Regular Governing Board Meeting – 12.8.21 agenda

The agenda for the above meeting and a memo highlighting certain reports are attached. The agenda can also be accessed at:  2021-12-08-GB Agenda

If you are attending in person, public session will begin at 6:00 p.m. and will be held in the Second Floor Board Room.  Please note that according to Contra Costa Health Services and effective August 3, 2021, masks are required for everyone, regardless of vaccination status, in indoor public spaces such as businesses, classrooms and offices.

If you are attending remotely, please see the information below to access the meeting.

Meeting link:                https://tinyurl.com/2021-12-08-GB-Agenda                       

            Meeting ID No.:           972 7628 0768

            Passcode:                     205040         

            Phone option:               1.669.900.6833          

Public Comment:  You may address an item on the agenda or a subject of your choice. The desired goal is to create an environment of mutual respect between participants of Governing Board meeting discussions; to enhance intellectual thought; and to insure that all present have an opportunity to present their views in an orderly fashion.  If you would like to make public comment at this meeting, please see the information listed on the attached agenda.  A fillable public comment card is also attached within the agenda and included here: 4CD Board Mtg Public Comment Card

Antioch mayor recall petition finally approved signature gathering begins

By Leave a Comment

Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe tossed his recall notice out of his car after being served by organizer Kathy Cabrera in the City Hall parking lot on Sept. 24, 2021. Screenshot of video courtesy of Kathy Cabrera. Thorpe then framed his recall notice and posed with it, later that day. Photo from Thorpe’s official Facebook page.

City Clerk, a Thorpe ally, provides copy of letter on day it’s due instead of only mailing it as she did three times, previously

“She was very accommodating, this time.” – Recall organizer Kathy Cabrera

160 days to collect 9,511 signatures of registered Antioch voters.

By Allen Payton

After being served with recall papers on Tuesday for abusing her position to benefit political ally, Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe, City Clerk Ellie Householder approved the petition for his recall in a letter to organizer Kathy Cabrera, today, Thursday, December 2, 2021. It was the 10th day since the fourth version of the petition was submitted, which is the legal limit. Unlike with her previous three letters rejecting Thorpe’s recall petition, this time Householder didn’t just send it by certified mail delaying the signature gathering by two more days, she also left a copy for the organizers at her office in City Hall. (See related articles here and here)

Antioch City Clerk Ellie Householder’s letter to organizer Kathy Cabrera approving the fourth Thorpe recall petition on Thursday, Dec. 2, 2021. Photo courtesy of Kathy Cabrera.

That allows signature gathering to begin, today. Organizers now have 160 days to collect 9,511 signatures of registered Antioch voters. Cabrera and Lindsey Amezcua, who is also helping lead the recall to remove Householder from the Antioch School Board, were the first to sign their names to Thorpe’s recall petition. Any registered voter in Antioch can sign the petition and help gather signatures. Approved Thorpe recall petition

Recall organizers Lindsey Amezcua and Kathy Cabrera sign and show the approved recall petition for Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe on Thursday, Dec. 2, 2021. Photos courtesy of Kathy Cabrera.

What took the County Clerk two days to do for Householder’s recall from the school board, took her and the Thorpe recall organizers almost two months to complete. The petition for the mayor’s recall was first submitted to the city clerk on Oct. 11th. (See related articles here and here)

“She was very accommodating, this time,” Cabrera said about Householder.

“The recall of Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe is ready to move ahead into the signature gathering phase,” Cabrera stated. “Signature gathering events are planned for this Saturday and Sunday.”

“This is bigger than anyone’s own personal views,” she continued. “The group of proponents and supporters are committed and have begun collecting the 9,511 signatures required to put the recall of Lamar Thorpe on the ballot.”

“We will follow the recall process and let the Antioch citizens’ voices be heard,” Cabrera added. “We believe the residents of Antioch deserve better as too many good people in City Hall, Antioch residents and Antioch businesses are leaving under Mayor Thorpe’s tenure.”

The mayor had the opportunity to provide a response which would have been printed on each petition copy. But he chose not to. Efforts to reach Thorpe for comment were unsuccessful prior to publication time.

The recall organizers will hold their first official signing event during the annual Holiday Delites celebration in historic, downtown Rivertown on Saturday. Following is the schedule they provided for this weekend:

Saturday 12/4/21 10am to 5pmRiverTown Sweets on W. 2nd Street.
Rivertown Treasure Chest on G Street
Sunday 12/5/21 10am to 2pmBluerock Starbucks – This will be a drive-up signing event.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Frazier announces resignation from Assembly to pursue career in transportation, spend time with family, friends

By 3 Comments

Assemblyman Jim Frazier. Source: Twitter

“It was the best job in the world, helping people and solving problems.”– Jim Frazier

Currently serves most of East County

By Allen Payton

In a post on his official Facebook page and Twitter feed, Wednesday, Dec. 1, 2021 State Assemblyman Jim Frazier (D-11) announced he will be resigning from his position at the end of the month.

In addition to posting his letter of resignation, at 12:32 pm Wednesday, he tweeted, “It has been a joy and a privilege to represent District 11. I extend my sincerest appreciation to each of you. Thank you all.” Frazier posted a similar comment on his Facebook page, writing, “It has been a joy and a privilege to represent District 11. I extend my sincerest appreciation and love for an incredible 9 years of service. Thank you all.”

His announcement dispels the rumors that Frazier, who moved from Oakley to Fairfield a few years ago, would run for supervisor in Solano County, State Senate or Congress, if Rep. John Garamendi was going to retire. But the Assemblyman, was first elected to the Assembly in 2012 following his time on the Oakley City Council, could have served one more term, since members of the state legislature can only serve a total of 12 years in either the Assembly or State Senate or a combination of both, due to term limits in Proposition 28 passed by voters in 2012.

When reached for comment Frazier said, “it’s time to move on and I have a strong urge to get back into the transportation sector, pursue my passion, and help people achieve their goals in transportation.”

“It was the best job in the world, helping people and solving problems,” he continued. I’ve served for 14 years in public service. It’s time to move on.”

Asked about the rumors he might run for another office, Frazier laughed and said, “nobody asked me.”

The press release reads: Jim Frazier resignation ltr 12-02-21

“California State Assemblymember Jim Frazier (D-Fairfield) today announced his resignation from the California State Assembly, District 11, effective December 31, 2021. Mr. Frazier will be seeking new opportunities in the field of transportation.

Assemblymember Frazier said, “This is the best job that I have ever had. I have enjoyed serving the State of California and the 11th Assembly District and greatly appreciate the confidence that my constituents have shown in me over the last nine years. I am proud of the many successes that we achieved together. My future plans are to put to use my passion and experience in the transportation sector, explore new career opportunities and spend additional time with family and friends.”

Mr. Frazier was elected to the California State Assembly, District 11 in November of 2012. The 11th District encompasses portions of Solano, Contra Costa and Sacramento counties and includes the following cities, towns, and areas: Antioch, Bethel Island, Birds Landing, Brentwood, Byron, Collinsville, Discovery Bay, Fairfield, Isleton, Knightsen, Locke, Oakley, Pittsburg (partial), Rio Vista, Suisun City, Travis Air Force Base, Vacaville and Walnut Grove.

Assemblymember Frazier currently serves as Chair of the powerful Assembly Governmental Organization Committee, providing oversight of open meeting laws, Offices of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, State Controller, and State Treasurer, State holidays, seals, and official acts, emergency services, Outdoor Advertising Act (billboards), alcohol, gaming, horse racing, the State Lottery, and tobacco. He has been an advocate for enhanced unemployment and disability policy as chairman of Select Committee on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. As a key member of the Assembly Veteran’s Committee, he supported legislation to improve lives of veterans. Mr. Frazier oversaw and helped coordinate state public works activities while serving as the Assembly Speaker’s appointee to the State Public Works Board. Mr. Frazier previously served as chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee, overseeing transportation infrastructure managing $2.3T in annual commerce, and promoting system improvements and job creation.

Additional key accomplishments:

  • Delivered numerous improvements to transportation infrastructure across high-speed rail, highways, and public transportation, securing $30B in total transportation funding and $5.2B for highly impactful SB1 infrastructure project.
  • Fostered legislation to obtain $1.2B in funding for special needs population, supporting and overseeing series of hearings throughout the State of California, evaluating the mission and effectiveness of relevant state agencies.
  • Established reputation as champion for California Delta, serving as key member of Delta Protection Commission focused on protecting fish and wildlife, safeguarding farmers, and ensuring continuous environmental and economic viability of delta by promoting water conservation, improved water quality, and improved management of land use and development.
  • Secured $12 million to remove abandoned and derelict commercial marine vessels throughout the Delta region through the 2021 State Budget.
  • Secured funding for Special Olympics for 6 years, including $20M funding through the 2021 State Budget.
  • Secured funding for Solano First 5 in the amount of $2 million to create a Fairfield First 5 Center through the 2021 State Budget.
  • Secured $500,000 for East Contra Costa Fire Protection District’s training program.
  • Authored legislation for a Veteran Designation of CA Driver’s License to recognize military service, resulting in hundreds of thousands of additional dollars for Veterans.

Mr. Frazier’s was recognized with many awards during his Assembly career. His accomplishments include (partial list): 2018, Legislator of the Year from the California State Commanders Veterans Council, 2017 California Transportation Foundation Elected Official of the Year, Director’s Special Recognition for Infrastructure Advocacy by American Society of Civil Engineers, 2016 Special Olympics Volunteer of the Year, 2016 AMVETS Legislator of the Year, 2015 Decoding Dyslexia: Assemblymember of the Year, 2015 California Transportation Foundation: Elected Official of the Year, 2015 Small Business Legislator of the year by California Small Business Association (CSBA) and California Small Business Roundtable (CSBR), 2015 CA Waterfowl Association, Grant Kenyon Award, Legislator of the Year, Appreciation Award: Sikh Communities of Napa and Solano Counties and Fairfield- Suisun Unified School District.

An avid supporter of non-profits, Mr. Frazier was a Founder and Vice President of the Friends of Oakley Community Foundation from 2007 until 2013. A dedicated volunteer, Mr. Frazier served on the Boys and Girls Club Advisory Board, a Board of Director member for Impact Teen Drivers and dearest to his heart, he has been a volunteer with Special Olympics since 2005.”

Contra Costa college board to hold redistricting hearing Dec. 8, but no online mapping tool offered for public input

By 2 Comments

Source: 4CD

Only one proposed map to be presented by district staff, attorney and only one public hearing will be held; wards aren’t required to be equal in size, can have a 5% population deviation from average, so they can match the Supervisors’ new map; Trustees Walters, Sandoval committed to an independent redistricting body/commission during their 2020 campaigns; Sandoval will request it at Dec. 8 meeting; Board President Li offers to consider one after process is completed; deadline is Feb. 28, 2022

By Allen Payton

During their meeting on Nov. 10, the Contra Costa Community College District (4CD) Board of Trustees received a presentation about Ward Equalization Based on the 2020 Census. The process will begin during a public hearing at their Dec. 8 meeting, with one map presented by District staff and attorney, and must be completed by the end of February. However, there will be no online mapping tool for the public to use to submit proposed, alternative maps, like the Board of Supervisors and some cities like Antioch and Brentwood have offered. 111021-4CD Trustee Area Redistricting presentation

According to the 2020 Census, the population of the District is now 1,165,927 a growth of 116,902 since 2010. That results in an average ward population of 233,186. Ward 5 has experienced the greatest population growth in the previous decade and is now 7.1% over average. Although state education code requires the population of each ward be equal “as nearly as may be”, according to 4CD staff the wards can legally have a population deviation from one to the other as great as 10%, just like the Board of Supervisors are allowed. Their final map has a total deviation of 9.77%. (See related article)

The 2011 ward map splits a variety of cities, including Pinole in West County, Martinez and Concord in Central County, and Pittsburg, Antioch and Brentwood in East County. Concord, Pleasant Hill, Pacheco and portions of Martinez and Pittsburg are included in Ward 2 The map includes Clayton and portions of Antioch and Brentwood with Danville, San Ramon, Blackhawk and Camino Tassajara in the Ward 4. Alamo is included in Ward 2 with Walnut Creek, Lafayette, Moraga and Orinda, as well as Hercules, Rodeo and Crockett, and portions of Pinole and Martinez.

In which cities the current board members live will be taken into consideration. Ward 2 Trustee Dr. Judy Walters lives in Martinez, and Ward 5 Trustee Fernando Sandoval, a Pittsburg resident, were elected last year. Ward 1 Trustee and Richmond resident, John Marquez, Ward 3 Trustee Rebecca Barrett who also lives in Martinez and Ward 4 Trustee Andy Li, a San Ramon resident, are up for election, next year.

According to the staff report on the Nov. 10th presentation, “Pursuant to Education Code Section 5019.5, following each decennial federal census, and using population figures as validated by the Demographic Research Unit of the Department of Finance as a basis, the governing board of each school district or community college district in which trustee areas have been established, and in which each trustee is elected by the residents of the area the trustee represents, shall adjust the boundaries of any or all of the trustee areas of the district such that the population of each is, as nearly as may be, the same proportion of the total population of the district as each of the other areas. 4CD must update ward boundaries as needed to achieve this equalization by February 28, 2022. The attached presentation is informational and represents the first phase of this process.”

Since there was nothing mentioning the districts ward equalization process on the 4CD website, several questions were asked of Executive Vice Chancellor Mojdeh Mezhdizadeh, in charge of the redistricting process, and District PIO Timothy Leong.

Q. Will there be an online mapping tool for the public to use to submit proposed maps on the district’s website, as other agencies, including Contra Costa County and the Cities of Antioch and Brentwood, as well as the state are offering.?

A. No. The process you are referring to are related to municipality actions being done in compliance with the Fair Maps Act, which are to be followed when cities and counties address the redistricting challenge following the 2020 Census. Community college districts are governed by different legal standards, specifically Education Code section 5019.5.

That code also reads:

“(a)(1) The population of each area is, as nearly as may be, the same proportion of the total population of the district as the ratio that the number of governing board members elected from the area bears to the total number of members of the governing board.

(2) The population of each area is, as nearly as may be, the same proportion of the total population of the district as each of the other areas.

(b) The boundaries of the trustee areas shall be adjusted by the governing board of each school district or community college district, in accordance with subdivision (a), before the first day of March of the year following the year in which the results of each decennial census are released. If the governing board fails to adjust the boundaries before the first day of March of the year following the year in which the results of each decennial census are released, the county committee on school district organization shall do so before the 30th day of April of the same year.”

Q. Will there be a hearing schedule for the public to participate in the process?

A. A public hearing on redistricting will be scheduled at the Governing Board’s December 8, 2021, meeting, to obtain community input on the District’s draft redistricting recommendation. In addition, a proposed draft map will be shared and described at this meeting.

Q. The presentation during the Nov. 10th board meeting and the staff report reads, “4CD must update ward boundaries as needed to achieve this equalization by February 28, 2022” and the “presentation is informational and represents the first phase of this process.” What is that process going to beand when, please? When will the next board meeting be held? It doesn’t show on the Board Docs webpage.

A. The presentation at the November 10, 2021, Governing Board meeting, was the first phase of the redistricting process. Since that meeting, 4CD research staff, under the direction of legal counsel, have been analyzing the 2020 Census information and are finalizing a draft recommendation to adjust the five wards in order to meet the population balance and proportions as required by Education Code.  This will be presented at the December 8, 2021, Governing Board meeting.

Q. Why doesn’t the board simply use the same map approved by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors? While I recognize there is a small portion of the county on the south end, east of San Ramon and Camino Tassajara is outside of the district. That would not change the deviation percentage much.

A. The development of supervisorial wards were done at a different time and separately from those of the 4CD trustees. The processes are also governed by different legal requirements. The College District is in the process of following applicable laws to meet the needs of its constituency.

Q. But why would that preclude the board from offering an online mapping tool for the public to use to submit proposed maps for consideration?

A. The opportunity for community input on 4CD’s redistricting process and proposal will be available during the Governing Board’s December 8, 2021, meeting. I understand you submitted a proposed redistricting map to the Board of Supervisors, and if you wish for our trustees to consider that map, I would recommend you submit it to Pat Kaya atpkaya@4cd.eduby December 3, 2021, so that it can be considered.

Q. Why will only one draft map be shared by staff at the Dec. 8 board meeting and not several alternatives?

A. Our recommendation to the Governing Board at the November 10, 2021, meeting, and based on past practice, was for staff to provide one map of a proposed adjustment to the ward boundaries. Trustees will have the opportunity to review the proposal at their December 8, 2021, meeting, and along with community input, can decide if it meets their approval or ask staff to make further adjustments to the proposal for review at their January 12, 2022, meeting.

Q. A very small portion of the county east of San Ramon and Camino Tassajara, is not in the 4CD, but is part of the Chabot-Las Positas Community College District. What is the population of the area of Contra Costa County not included in the district?

A. We are seeking the County’s assistance to determine the population of the county that is not covered within the 4CD service territory because we do not track that information.

Q. After reading that education code section, it appears school and college district boards must follow the same guideline as the U.S. House of Representatives in having equal population per district, with no 5% maximum deviation like the Board of Supervisors can have.

A. Legal counsel advises us that we do not follow the same standard as the House of Representatives. For example, school (districts) having a 10% and below deviation are presumptively balanced for legal purposes.

Q. In response Mezhdizadeh and Leong were asked, “does that mean a 5% deviation from average? If so, why can’t the maps created for the Board of Supervisors work for the college district?”

12/2/21 UPDATE: Leong responded, “We are required to assess based on variance, and our max is 10%. Based on the data we received from the 2020 Census, we learned the variance was over 10%, triggering the work to rebalance our wards. Our recommended draft ward boundaries now have a variance of 1.7%.”

As for using the map created for the Board of Supervisors, he responded, “That is a conversation and decision for the Governing Board to make.”

Regarding the population of the area of Contra Costa County not included in the district, Leong wrote, “According to the County Elections Office, Census Tract 3551.12 contains 116 census blocks, and has a population of 1,593.”

Two Trustees Committed to Independent Redistricting Body/Commission

During the 2020 election campaign, Ward 2 Trustee Dr. Walters said she would support an independent redistricting body to redraw districts, in response to a question from the League of Women Voters.

“After the 2020 Census is completed, districts will need to be redrawn in 2021. If elected, will you support an independent redistricting body to redraw districts? Why or why not?

Answer from Judy E. Walters: Yes, independent redistricting bodies have drawn impartial boundaries and avoid gerrymandering, or drawing district lines that benefit certain incumbent legislators and/or the political party in power.”

In response to the same question, Ward 5 Trustee Fernando Sandoval also gave his support for an independent redistricting commission.

“Answer from Fernando Sandoval: I will wholeheartedly support an independent redistricting commission to redraw districts for Contra Costa Community Colleges. Both the State of California and municipalities like the City of Berkeley and several others have passed measures to create commissions that are free of political influence. This, in turn, has ensured that the districts that are ultimately agreed upon are more representative of the communities of interest that reside there.”

Board Can Increase the Number of Trustees

That same code section also reads: “the authority to establish or abolish trustee areas, rearrange the boundaries of trustee areas, increase or decrease the number of members of the governing board, or adopt any method of electing governing board members may be exercised only as otherwise provided under this article.”

Q. Does that mean the college board can increase the number of trustees on the board and corresponding districts? If they choose to do so, does that need to occur during the redistricting process? What is the maximum number of trustees allowed on the board?

A. The Governing Board can decide to change the number of elected trustees at any time and does not have to coincide with this redistricting process. It is a completely separate topic from the post-census Redistricting process, which is the District’s main focus at this time in order to meet the February 28, 2022, deadline.

Questions for Trustees

In an email on Saturday afternoon, all five trustees were asked the following questions:

Will you support forming an independent redistricting commission of residents to assist you with the Ward Equalization, this year?

Will you also commit to basing the new boundaries on principles of:

  1. One person one vote with as little population deviation from one district to the other;
  1. Compactness;
  2. Communities of Interest – such as keeping all the San Ramon Valley cities and communities together, and not including East County with the San Ramon Valley as the current Ward 4 does; and
  3. Splitting the larger cities, first, such as Concord, Antioch and Walnut Creek

If you choose to have ward populations with a deviation as much as 10%, recognizing a very small portion of the county is not in the college district, why not simply adopt the same map the Board of Supervisors adopted?

Would you support increasing the number of trustees and corresponding districts to seven, as the Las Positas-Chabot Community College District and Peralta Community College District have? Why or why not?

Finally, in which city do each of you live? Only President Li includes that he lives in San Ramon in his bio on the 4CD website Board page. Since that will be a consideration in redrawing the ward boundaries, that’s important for the public to know when giving input to you during the process.

Board President Li Responds

Only Board President Li responded to the Herald’s questions with the following:

“The Contra Costa Community College District (4CD) is working closely with legal counsel to ensure we administer a fair and impartial redistricting process following Education Code section 5019.5. Since 2020 Census data was released about 6 months later than usual, 4CD did not receive the final 2020 census data until the last week of September and we are required to complete our post-census redistricting process by February 28, 2022 as required by law.

4CD is following a process to re-draw ward boundaries to ensure population balance and proportion as stipulated in Education Code. Other considerations presented and discussed at the Governing Board’s November 10, 2021, meeting, included ensuring compliance with the federal voter rights act, compact and contiguous areas, respecting communities of interest as much as possible, and respecting incumbency.

The questions in your November 27, 2021, email refers to your interest in obtaining support for an independent redistricting body to redraw our ward boundaries that could be consistent with ward areas similar to those recently approved by the Board of Supervisors. This was not the direction we provided staff during our November 10, 2021, public meeting.

If there was interest by the trustees to pursue this idea to completely redraw our ward boundaries and other proposals such as increasing the number of trustees, the Governing Board would place this item on a future meeting agenda so the conversation could be done publicly, and it would take place after we have rebalanced our existing wards based on populations changes outlined in the 2020 Census.

Regarding the use of a public mapping tool, the Governing Board did not feel this it was necessary to rebalancing the population as required by Education Code 5019.5. If, after the completion of the redistricting work is completed, and the Governing Board chooses to pursue the idea to completely revamp our trustee wards, a mapping tool could also be considered.”

Since he didn’t answer some of the questions, Li was asked the following, again: “If you choose to have ward populations with a deviation as much as 10%, recognizing a very small portion of the county is not in the college district, why not simply adopt the same map the Board of Supervisors adopted? Would you support increasing the number of trustees and corresponding districts to seven, as the Las Positas-Chabot Community College District and Peralta Community College District have? Why or why not?”

Four Other Board Members Asked, Again

The other four board members were sent the same questions, again asking for each of them to respond. In addition, Walters and Sandoval were specifically asked, “why didn’t you propose appointing an independent citizens commission for redistricting as you committed during your campaigns, last year?”

Sandoval Responds, Commits to Requesting Independent Commission

“The board in open session has not had a discussion on redistricting, yet because we haven’t seen the data,” Sandoval said when reached for comment. “I want to ensure the public has the opportunity to weigh in on the process and the work that will be done by district staff. That’s part of the transparency we need to have for the process.”

“I will fulfill my commitment to ask for the independent redistricting commission,” he added. “Speaking on my own behalf, I will also ask for more transparency.”

Regarding expanding the board to seven members, Sandoval said, “that’s something for the board to discuss. It isn’t something I ran on in 2016 or 2020 and was elected to do. But I’m open to having that discussion. Having seven board members is a mixed bag for several different reasons. But we have to discuss it and let the public weigh in on it.

Minutes of the November 10th board meeting was not yet available on the 4CD website as of publication time. It has been requested of Leong, Wednesday afternoon, Dec. 1. Minutes of past meetings are only available in the agenda of the next meeting. The Dec. 8 board meeting agenda is not yet posted on the 4CD’s Board Docs website. The links to the archive of board meeting videos are also not easy to find. They’re available, here: https://www.4cd.edu/gb/videos.html.

To contact each of the trustees, please see their phone and email contact information, here.

Please check back later for updates to this report.

Candidate for Contra Costa DA, Mary Knox offers three-point plan to prevent smash-and-grab retail theft

By Leave a Comment

Sources: (Left) Herald file photo and (Right) Mary Knox for DA campaign.

The current DA has been slow to respond to flash mob robberies, and once she responds, she’s ineffective. Given my 36 years of experience as a Contra Costa Deputy District Attorney, I know the District Attorney can do more. We need to implement these three steps immediately:

  1. Convene a Bay Area-wide law enforcement response to track and apprehend suspects 

Contra Costa law enforcement agencies are partnered to provide mutual aid during emergency situations.  This “mutual aid” concept should be employed throughout the Bay Area to strategically shut down access routes for potential retail targets to intervene and prevent crime before it happens.

The investigative and technological expertise of this team will:

  • Identify the criminal syndicates who organize the smash-and-grab robberies
  • Intercept the “chatter” on social media planning these events
  • Share information between law enforcement agencies to quickly locate and arrest perpetrators

The ideal team to coordinate this activity is the DA/FBI Safe Streets Task Force, comprised of local, state, and federal task force agents who are partnered with prosecutors assigned to the Community Violence Reduction Unit (a unit that I created in the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office).

Given the violence involved and the value of the merchandise being stolen, the Task Force will collaborate with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to charge qualifying cases under the Hobbs Act and prosecute them in federal court.

The criminal syndicates committing the smash-and-grab robberies, as well as strings of residential burglaries in Contra Costa, are mobile and active in surrounding counties.  During the past four years, regional law enforcement agencies have done an impressive job of sharing information to identify the true scope of the criminality of these crews and to provide investigative support.  The information supplied by this well-coordinated network provided me with the evidence required to file multiple counts following very significant organized retail theft and residential robberies.  I worked with the Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill Police Departments through the investigative challenges of the looting in 2020 and filed charges on a number of suspects.  As District Attorney, I will continue to support this allied inter-county effort.

  1. Prevent the use of our freeways as crime corridors, deploy cameras 

Organized shoplifting gangs have been using the regional freeway system to quickly move between targets in neighboring law enforcement jurisdictions.  By the time an investigation starts at the first crime, the gang has moved on to loot another store in the next county.

Contra Costa’s Freeway Security Network has the technological capability to combat organized retail theft.  The Allied Freeway Agencies have received additional funding for the Network and direction to develop a plan to augment and expand the Network county-wide in order to provide technological leads in preventing and investigating criminal syndicates involved in the violent organized retail theft.

I am proud to have originated the creation of this freeway camera system to combat freeway shootings.  Since the network was installed, freeway shootings have been reduced by 90% in Contra Costa while remaining all too frequent in neighboring counties. I continue to work with law enforcement and elected leaders to propose that additional funding that Governor Newsom included in the state budget be used to incorporate additional technology to target organized retail theft into the Freeway Security Network.

  1. Disrupt the use of social media as a key enabler of looting 

Organized retail theft would not exist without social media, which is the key element to planning and profiting from these crimes.

Looting is coordinated through social media 

Social media platforms provide the means of communication which allows criminals to conspire to commit take-over robberies. These platforms are directly aiding and abetting the commission of large-scale crimes, which may result in criminal liability for the social media platforms.  I will call on the social media platforms, as well as private communication platforms, to monitor and immediately report to law enforcement any communications planning a smash-and-grab robbery or the “fencing” of stolen property.

We must make it clear to technology companies that failure to monitor and report the coordination of criminal enterprise should not be a protected business activity and should instead be considered as aiding and abetting that crime.

Stolen goods are sold via online marketplaces 

If a market for the merchandise that is being stolen did not exist, the criminal syndicates would have no motive to steal.  While I am out talking with community members, most are surprised to learn that the merchandise that is stolen from CVS, Walgreens, Lululemon and the high-end retailers is often sold on the internet via OfferUp, LetGo, and the Facebook and Amazon Market Places.

As District Attorney, I will actively engage and educate our community members about the crime occurring in our county and ways we can work together to combat it, such as not buying merchandise off the internet that does not have a means of guaranteeing that it is not stolen merchandise.  I will also work with retail stores to modify their return/exchange policies to ensure that they are not accepting the return of their own stolen merchandise.

———————————————————-

About Mary Knox: Mary Knox was born and raised in Walnut Creek and has 36 years of experience advocating and fighting for victims, their families, and the larger community. She is a lead prosecutor in the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s office, who has prosecuted and won high profile cases against some of the most notorious criminals in county history. She has broken the chokehold that criminal gangs have had on the most disadvantaged communities and has engaged in meaningful violence reduction by instituting effective strategies to reduce crime and prosecute violent criminals. Learn more about Mary at maryknox4da.com

 

Contra Costa Supervisors vote 5-0 to finalize 2021 redistricting map

By 2 Comments

Contra Costa Board of Supervisors approved the 2021 Redistricting Map D. Source; Contra Costa County

Only 93 people provided public, nine alternate maps submitted; splits Walnut Creek, Concord and Antioch; reunites Pinole and the San Ramon Valley

By Daniel Borsuk

During their final public hearing for the 2021 redistricting process on Tuesday, Nov. 23, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 to approve the 2021 Redistricting Map D on Tuesday that shows Supervisor Candace Andersen’s District 2 and Supervisor Federal Glover’s District 5 gaining territory at the expense of District 3 Supervisor Dianne Burgis and District 1 Supervisor John Gioia. (See agenda item D.1)

The supervisors’ action on the final redistricting map beat the mandatory Dec. 15 deadline by 22 days after county officials conducted a series of public hearings and workshops that drew meager citizen input. (See related article)

“For the six workshops a total of 21 individuals provided public comment either in person or by Zoom or phone call; and an additional 72 individuals were on the Zoom or phone call in portions of the workshops but chose not to speak,” a county document stated in defense of the public participation.

No matter how uneven the county process might have been in attracting public participation, two districts – District 2 and District 5 – scored the most territory and potential political clout from the decennial redistricting process.

After the final vote on the map, Board Chair Burgis of Brentwood put a positive spin on the two-month redistricting activity stating.

“The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors thanks the community for its participation in this decennial process,” she said. “We have been committed to a robust Redistricting and public outreach process with public hearings, a dedicated website at CoCoRedistricting.org, public workshops, and multiple ways for the public to share input, including an online mapping tool to draw maps and submit comments.  We want to thank you for staying informed and playing a role in this important process.”

“I’d like you to not vote on this today,” requested Sherrill Grower, one of three persons who spoke at Tuesday’s meeting. “I feel like this map disenfranchises the public particularly along the northern waterfront. I am not pleased with the proposed district boundaries.”

Map D with population statistics. Source: Contra Costa County

With the new map, District 4 now covers most of Walnut Creek split at Highway 24 and Interstate 680 with District 2 Supervisor Andersen representing the other portion of the city, primarily Rossmoor.

District 4 underwent the smallest population gain of the five districts with a 1.65 percent increase from 2010 to 2020, to 229,348 residents, according to Census data. Whites represent 51.7 percent of District 4’s population followed by Latinos at 22.4 percent, Asians at 15.2 percent, Blacks at 3 percent and 7.7 percent for others.

District 4 Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, who has announced she won’t seek re-election in 2022, also saw the city of Concord, which is in District 4, split with Glover’s District 5 by Highways 4 and 242 and the former railroad right-of-way.

Mainly because Andersen’s District 2 experienced the biggest population gain of any of the other districts, from 2010 to 2020 it gained more territory. Population-wise, District 2’s population rose from 218,017 in 2010 to 243,565 in 2020. Whites make up 55 percent of the district’s population followed by Asians at 28 percent, Latinos at 8.5 percent, and Blacks at 1.6 percent and others at 6.8 percent.

District 2 will now cover Tassajara Valley, Blackhawk, Diablo and Camino Tassajara, all formerly were represented by Supervisor Burgis.

District 3, which saw its population rise 2.85 percent to 203,711 from 2010 to 2020, covers most of Antioch and the other growing cities of Brentwood and Oakley and communities of Bethel Island, Knightsen, Discovery Bay, and Byron.

District 2 also contains the cities of San Ramon, Danville, Moraga, Lafayette, and Orinda. The census designated Alamo, Blackhawk, Diablo, Camino Tassajara, Saranap, and Castle Rock as contained in District 2.

In addition to the cities of Pleasant Hill and Clayton, the Contra Costa Centre, Acalanes Ridge, Shell Ridge, San Miguel and North Gate are in District 4.

Glover, who offered no comment on the final redistricting map, also gained territory. He not only retains the Northern Waterfront, an area now under planning study for future industrial and economic development from Crockett to Oakley, but District 5 now, no longer has a portion of Pinole that was formerly split by District 1’s Gioia and District 5’s Glover.

Not mentioned publicly, District 5 is due to benefit economically and demographically when bulldozers rev up at the former Concord Naval Weapons Station where the Seeno Company has won City of Concord approval to build 13,000 housing units and commercial developments on 5,046 acres on the former Naval weapons base property in north Concord. Construction should be well underway over the next 10 years.

Map D keeps Antioch split in two between Districts 3 and 5, as the city currently is, but in different ways. This time the districts are split along Somersville Road and Auto Center Drive and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Herald publisher Allen Payton asked the supervisors to consider splitting Antioch along the city boundary line with Pittsburg and Highway 4, which he said makes more sense for residents to know what district they live in and to match the current and expected district boundaries for Antioch City Council District 1. Burgis said she tried to make that happen but the population figures to comply with the 5% deviation legal requirement, didn’t work.

Based on U.S. Census data, District 5’s population increased from 203,744 in 2010 to 228,463 in 2020. Thirty-five percent of the district’s population is Latino, 27.5 percent is White, 17.9 percent is Asian and 12.4 percent is Black.

Supervisor John Gioia was pleased with the redistricting results, especially when more urban-like district contains the cities of Richmond, San Pablo, El Cerrito, and Pinole. Kensington, North Richmon, East Richmond Heights, El Sobrante, Rollingwood, Tara Hills, Montalvin Manor, and Bayview are also included in District 1.

District 1’s population grew from 203,437 persons in 2010 to 224,726 in 2020, according to U.S. Census data. Latinos represent 40.9 percent of the district’s population followed by whites at 21.7 percent, Asians at 16.8 percent and Blacks at 16.8 percent

“The boundaries are very similar to our local transportation district,” observed Gioia. “There is no gerrymandering.”

Overall, Contra Costa County’s population increased 11.4 percent to 1,168,064.

 

With minimal public input Contra Costa Supervisors choose redistricting map

By 1 Comment

Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 2021 Redistricting Map D.

Endorse Map D keeping their districts mostly the same

Splits Concord minimally; keeps Antioch split but along different lines; reunites Pinole; moves Alamo, Blackhawk and Camino Tassajara into the same district as the rest of the San Ramon Valley

By Daniel Borsuk

With scant public testimony and only three complete community map submissions, during their meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 9, Contra Costa Supervisors decided to move forward with the 2021 redistricting effort by selecting Map D as the preferred alternative. It creates proposed supervisorial boundaries that will be in place for the next 10 years.  CCCBOS Redistricting 2021 NOV 9 presentation-part 1    CCCBOS Redistricting 2021 NOV 9 presentation-part 2

With the clock ticking for supervisors to wrap up the federally mandated redistricting effort by Dec. 15, county officials have not received an abundance of public input at public hearings and workshops on proposed supervisorial maps, but after supervisors again heard meager public input on the proposed maps, the elected officials decided to move forward to comply with federal law.

At the end of day, of the four maps proposed by county staff and the three complete alternative maps submitted by the public, supervisors chose Map D mainly because it presents the fewest revisions from the current districts. However, it offers districts with the greatest deviation of 9.77% in population between districts of all four maps offered by county staff. It only splits up the cities of Concord, Antioch and Walnut Creek.

Impacts

The chosen map results in Districts 3 and 5 with the least population, 11,568 and 11,425 fewer residents than average, respectively, and Districts 2 and 4 with the most population of 11,264 and 9,273 greater than average. So, Districts 3 and 5 Supervisors will represent about 21,000 to 23,000 fewer residents than Districts 2 and 4. District 1 will have the lowest deviation from average population of just 2,455 residents or 1.05%.

Map D reunites Pinole moving a portion from the current District 5 into District 1 in West County.

It moves Alamo, Blackhawk and Tassajara Valley from the current District 3 into District 2, allowing them to join the rest of the San Ramon Valley.

It keeps Antioch split in two between Districts 3 and 5, as the city currently is, but along different streets and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way, in one part.

It keeps the Rossmoor community of Walnut Creek split from the rest of that city, and leaves it in District 2, while the rest of the city will be in District 4.

The map also shifts a portion of Concord from District 4 into District 5.

District 4 Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, who announced she will not seek re-election next year, liked Map D because it presents the “least intrusion into Concord.”  District 4 would also pick up the Morgan Territory area.

“If I could have all of Antioch I would,” said Board Chair Burgis.

District 1 Supervisor John Gioia, whose seat is also up for election next year, acknowledged with Map D his district cannot go beyond Pinole and El Sobrante. The neighboring and nearby communities of Hercules and Crockett will be fully represented by District 5 Supervisor Federal Glover.

Contra Costa Herald proposed CCC Board of Supervisors Redistricting Map and statistics. (Note: The district numbers are incorrect as the Herald’s publisher couldn’t figure out how to choose the correct ones while using the county’s online mapping tool.)

Alternative Maps

There were only 12 community submissions with eight complete maps and four community of interest maps, using the county’s online mapping tool. Two of the complete maps were submitted by one person and three by another, So, only five people submitted complete, alternative maps.  CCCBOS Redistricting 2021 Community Submission Maps Oct05&19    CCCBOS Redistricting 2021 Community Submission Maps Nov09

Two of the complete maps offered total population deviations between the districts of 10.55% and 13.38%, which is greater than the 10% maximum deviation legally allowed. The population of each district can only be 5% greater or lesser than average. The other five maps split up communities of interest

The community submission of a complete map of the five districts, by the Contra Costa Herald, complied with the population deviation requirement of no greater or fewer than 5% from average. The map offers districts with the least population deviation of just 1.67% compared to the four maps proposed by county staff, while respecting both city and community boundaries, except for Concord and Antioch, the county’s largest cities. In general, the Contra Costa Herald map uses major city streets as the dividing lines, such as A Street in Antioch, and the districts are as compact as possible.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

California Citizens Redistricting Commission releases draft district maps for 2022 elections

By 1 Comment

Proposed new Congressional Districts for Contra Costa for the next 10 years divide the county into two instead of among five districts, as it is currently. Source: California Citizens Redistricting Commission

For Congressional, State Senate, State Assembly, Board of Equalization districts; changes will affect who represents Contra Costa.

The draft State Senate district maps split Contra Costa into three districts, placing Brentwood with communities as far away as Rohnert Park, Calistoga and Dunigan.

More public input encouraged.

SACRAMENTO, CA—On Wednesday, the 2020 California Citizens Redistricting Commission released draft maps for the state’s Congressional, State Senate, Assembly and Board of Equalization districts ahead of the CA Supreme Court mandated November 15, 2021 deadline.

“We are finally here. We proudly present these draft maps to the people of California as a starting point for public discussion. These are not intended to be final maps and we strongly encourage Californians to continue weighing in until we get it right,” stated Commission Chair Trena Turner. “A global pandemic and delayed census data would not stop this commission from delivering on its promise to create maps that encourage fair representation. We will have final maps completed and certified by the December 27, 2021 deadline. There is still plenty of time for the public to get involved. We urge you to join us because everything is on the lines.”

A major consideration in redrawing the Congressional districts was the fact that California lost a seat in the decennial reapportionment due to population shifts away from the state. That reduces the delegation in the House of Representatives from 53 to 52. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, across the country, the Golden State was joined by Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and West Virginia in losing one Congressional seat each. Oregon, Montana, Colorado, North Carolina and Florida each gained one seat, while Texas gained two Congressional seats.

Proposed new State Senate Districts for Contra Costa County puts Far East County in the same district as all of Solano and Yolo Counties and portions of Sacramento, Napa and Sonoma Counties.

Impacts to Contra Costa County Districts

The draft maps show Contra Costa County split in just two Congressional districts compared to four, currently. The draft State Senate district maps split Contra Costa into three districts, with Far East County cities and communities of Brentwood, Oakley, Discovery Bay, Byron, Bethel Island and Knightsen included with all of Solano and Yolo Counties and portions of Sacramento, Napa and even Sonoma County communities as far away as Rohnert Park, Calistoga and Dunigan. The draft State Assembly districts map split the county into four districts, with Pinole, Hercules, Rodeo, Crockett and Port Costa included in the same district as Solano County.

According to an SFGate.com news report, “In the Bay Area…Contra Costa County has been the biggest source of complaints…some…Antioch residents have complained about African American neighborhoods being split up, while residents south of them in the Tri-Valley area are annoyed that San Ramon and Dublin were kept in separate congressional districts.”

Using the multitude of communities of interest testimony the Commission received throughout the summer, they assessed how that testimony could potentially inform district boundaries considering the tradeoffs that needed to be made in eventual maps. The Commission produced three sets of visualizations (October 27-29, November 2-4, November 7-9) that incorporated additional public input to evolve into draft maps.

Draft maps can be found here and below.

Approved Draft Maps
CONGRESS

STATE SENATE

ASSEMBLY

BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

We encourage the public to provide feedback using this form.

Proposed new Assembly Districts for Contra Costa County would include Pinole, Hercules and Crockett with Solano County in the same district.

Public comment shall be taken for at least 14 days from the date of public display of the first preliminary statewide (draft) maps of the Congressional, State Senatorial, Assembly, and State Board of Equalization districts. The Commission shall not display any other map for public comment during the 14-day period.

Draft Map Public Input Meeting Schedule
November 17, 2021—Congressional District Feedback
November 18, 2021—Assembly District Feedback
November 19, 2021—Senate District Feedback
November 20, 2021—Board of Equalization & Any District Feedback
November 22, 2021—Any District Feedback
November 23, 2021—Any District Feedback

Public input meeting appointments can be made here.

In accordance with the California Constitution, the Commission followed these criteria, in this order, to draw district maps:

  1. Districts must be of equal population to comply with the U.S. Constitution.
  2. Districts must comply with the Voting Rights Act to ensure that minorities have an equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choice.
  3. Districts must be drawn contiguously, so that all parts of the district are connected to each other.
  4. Districts must minimize the division of cities, counties, neighborhoods and communities of interest to the extent possible.
  5. Districts should be geographically compact: such that nearby areas of population are not bypassed for a more distant population. This requirement refers to density, not shape. Census blocks cannot be split.
  6. Where practicable each Senate District should be comprised of two complete and adjacent Assembly Districts, and Board of Equalization districts should be comprised of 10 complete and adjacent State Senate Districts.

In addition, the place of residence of any incumbent or political candidate may not be considered in the creation of a map, and districts may not be drawn for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against an incumbent, political candidate, or political party.

Every 10 years, after the federal government publishes updated census information, California must redraw the boundaries of its electoral districts so that the state’s population is evenly allocated among the new districts.

In 2008, California voters passed the Voters First Act, authorizing the creation of the independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw new State Senate, State Assembly, and State Board of Equalization district lines. In 2010, the Voters First Act for Congress gave the Commission the responsibility of drawing new Congressional districts following every census.

For more information, please visit www.WeDrawTheLinesCA.org.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.