REDWOOD CITY — Despite a controversial and often heated debate over new district boundaries for the next decade, San Mateo County supervisors on Tuesday unanimously adopted a map with minimal changes, going against recommendations made by the county’s redistricting commission.
That 15-member advisory commission was tasked with leading the redistricting process in August and ultimately recommended two possible maps in October after narrow, 8 to 7 votes: one which gave minority groups greater political power, and another which aimed to keep communities whole based on their regional objectives.
But in choosing a map that changes little about current districts on Tuesday, supervisors have faced criticism from some members of the public and the advisory committee. With two supervisors — Carole Groom and Don Horsley — terming out in 2022, and Warren Slocum and Dave Pine gone in 2024, the stakes couldn’t be higher as voters are set to choose new leadership for the county in the next five years.
Unlike the recommended maps — which would have drastically changed district lines — supervisors on Tuesday opted for a map they said will provide an opportunity for underrepresented groups to gain seats on the board while keeping old boundaries relatively intact.
County officials said the “Communities Together” map chosen by supervisors “best meets federal and state law requirements, including, to the extent practicable, respecting geographical integrity of any local neighborhood or local community of interest.”
Two of the five new districts — District 1 (encompassing South San Francisco, half of San Bruno, Millbrae, Burlingame, Hillsborough and other small mid-county unincorporated communities) and District 5 (encompassing Daly City, Broadmoor, Brisbane, about half of San Bruno, Colma and some communities west of Interstate 280) — split some communities in half but have voting age populations that are majority-minority. That means the majority of eligible voters are ethnic minorities.
Supervisor David Canepa’s district in north county is now about 80% majority-minority, while Supervisor Pine’s district is about 58% majority-minority. District 2 — which is San Mateo, Foster City and half of Belmont — and District 4 — encompassing Redwood City, North Fair Oaks, about half of Menlo Park and East Palo Alto — have roughly equal voting age populations of minority and non-Hispanic white residents, county staff said.
Representing largely white coastal communities in District 3, Horsley praised the new district map in a statement, saying it preserves the integrity of local communities and neighborhoods with shared interests while minimizing the division of coastal communities and those living in heavily Hispanic East Palo Alto, Belle Haven, North Fair Oaks and Redwood City.
Slocum — who represents the heavily Hispanic District 4 — said in a statement the new map made “some good adjustments and it kept communities of interest together.” He said the next challenge is increasing voter registration in his district.
Canepa said the map supervisors voted for is the “best one out there” and pushed back against criticism that supervisors were “playing politics” in keeping districts largely unchanged. Still, some advisory commissioners questioned why they spent months quarreling over maps only to have their recommendations ignored by the board.
Nirmala Bandrapalli of Burlingame, who served on the commission, complained that resources were not properly aligned for the commission to work on redistricting effectively. She added that the time constraint also limited the commission’s ability to reach a decision.
“Ten years from now, it should be an independent commission to be appointed like other counties like Los Angeles and San Diego have done,” Bandrapalli said. “We need an independent commission working on this effort in the future.”
Bandrapalli also advocated for adding two seats to the five-member board as the county continues to grow, which will help in representing more communities and increase the likelihood of minority representation and more women on the board.
Still, Canepa called Tuesday’s decision a “landmark occasion” and the map a “fair” one that ensures that “everyone has a seat at the table.”
“The bottom line is this is the most equitable map, and the data supports it,” Canepa said. “The map before us and the map we voted on gives people of color the greatest opportunity to be elected, and that’s something to be proud of.”
Source: www.mercurynews.com