Final Public County Redistricting Meeting 6/9/2011 With Three Map Options
Original post made by Billie, Mohr Park, on Jun 7, 2011
While I continue to be very concerned with the Board's intentions towards the Tri-Valley, we aren't the only communities being gerrymandered. There are three maps that have now been submitted with redistricting alternatives. Map A is the County's version. Maps C and D were drawn and submitted by an independent citizens group, the Alameda County Citizens Redistricting Task Force. Map B was originally submitted by the citizen's group, but was subsequently withdrawn.
I have included specific web links for the population information associated with each one of the maps. The information for Map A gives a very clear picture of what the County is moving towards in this round of redistricting. The only difference between Maps C and D is that Map D splits Oakland into three districts, while Map C splits Oakland between only two districts.
Map A population information drawn by Board of Supervisors Staff/Committee:
Map C population information drawn & submitted by an independent citizens group, the Alameda County Citizens Redistricting Task Force:
Map D population information drawn & submitted by an independent citizens group, the Alameda County Citizens Redistricting Task Force:
Just a few other key points:
With Map A, only 11 cities/towns, or 55%, of the 20 Alameda County communities involved in redistricting, are 100% within one district. With Maps C & D, 16 cities/towns, or 80% of the 20 Alameda County communities are 100% within one district, retaining most of Alameda County's communities as whole entities. Note that reuniting the 478 residents of San Leandro split off into District 4 with the rest of their community in District 3, would bring the percentage of communities that have been retained whole within a district up to 85% for both Maps C and D.
With Map A, along with the three largest Alameda County cities of Oakland, Hayward and Fremont, which are all well over 100K, the other communities that have been split up in Map A are small towns ranging in population size from 913 in population (Sunol) to 70K (Pleasanton). Seven communities, Dublin, Fremont, Pleasanton, Sunol, Cherryland, San Lorenzo and Ashland, are divided between two districts. Oakland and Hayward are divided between three districts.
Map C minimizes the splitting of communities between districts. Only the 4 largest Alameda County cities(Oakland, Hayward, Fremont and San Leandro) have been separated, and then between only two districts.
Ridiculously, with Map A, there are even three communities that have tiny amounts of population split from the main population group into a different district. Map A places TWO Cherryland residents in District 2 and the rest of Cherryland's population in District 4. TWENTY-SEVEN of San Lorenzo's residents have been placed in District 2 while the rest are in District 3. TWELVE Hayward residents are in District 3, FIVE in District 4, and the rest in District 2. C'mon, really??!! I find it truly disturbing that the County's preferred redistricting view is to split what looks like individuals and families away from their communities.
My choice is Map C is because it does the most to clean up gerrymandered district lines, retain communities as whole entities, preserve "communities of interest", and distribute Alameda County's current population evenly between the five districts while still planning for future growth.
Please contact the Board/Redistricting Committee and let them know your choice. Tell them that now is the time to step back from politicking and gerrymandering and do what's right for Alameda County residents and their communities!
Thank you for your time.
Pleasanton resident will have his hands full trying to keep the Oakland teams
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 926 views
The House of Representatives performs history’s first repeat hara-kiri
By Tom Cushing | 0 comments | 136 views