Town Square

Post a New Topic

Final Public County Redistricting Meeting 6/9/2011 With Three Map Options

Original post made by Billie, Mohr Park, on Jun 7, 2011

The following information is available with the presentation material for the final public County Redistricting Meeting being held 6/9/2011 in Fremont. Web Link

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 Map B was originally submitted by the citizen’s group, but was subsequently withdrawn.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:
Web Link

Map C population information drawn & submitted by an independent citizens group, the Alameda County Citizens Redistricting Task Force:
Web Link

Map D population information drawn & submitted by an independent citizens group, the Alameda County Citizens Redistricting Task Force:
Web Link

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.

Comments (3)

Like this comment
Posted by Thanks
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 8, 2011 at 4:46 pm

Thanks for posting this information. Very interesting.

Like this comment
Posted by Kelley
a resident of Canyon Meadows
on Jun 9, 2011 at 3:31 pm

The Pleasanton Weekly should cycle this to the top to remind Pleasanton residents they should be there in a show of support in keeping Pleasanton whole.

I like Map D.

The fact that the County only submitted one map that splits Pleasanton is a shame. Largest cities are to be split first.

Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Ridgeview Commons

on Apr 26, 2017 at 2:04 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Salami, Salami … Baloney
By Tom Cushing | 24 comments | 738 views

Time for new collaboration between city and school district
By Tim Hunt | 2 comments | 522 views

Holiday Fund raises $70,000 for 12 Tri-Valley nonprofits
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 120 views