While all eyes were on the state redistricting, the county was ‘doing its own thing’ … the same thing … redistricting
According to the county, when the population count is ascertained, there has to be a division of five supervisorial districts divided as evenly as possible so that the communities are adequately represented … and taking a page from the state’s ‘redistricting book’, adequately would mean communities of interest. Configuring those district boundaries constitute redistricting.
The county charter states that the County of Los Angeles shall have a Board of Supervisors consisting of five members, each of whom must be an elector of the district which she/he represents, and must reside therein during their incumbency.
Lately, there has been some bickering about the district boundaries. Just as the state is about to wrap up its redistricting – with all its problems – up pops the county. At issue, it appears that Supervisor Don Knabe’s and Zev Yaroslavsky’s districts may be at risk of losing some of their supervisorial land space.
Like with the state, the Latino population is the fastest growing group – it’s 48 percent in the county – and therefore, a larger piece of the supervisorial land space come into play to accommodate adequate representation, per the county charter. But any changes must also comply with the 14th Amendment and the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Supervisor Mark Ridley Thomas has stated: “Two factors are of vital importance: the first is that the Board scrupulously adhere to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ; the second is that we endeavor to avoid expensive and time-consuming litigation. Today (Tuesday) the Board heard heart-felt testimony from constituents from every district in the County — it was very valuable input — but much more work remains to be done,” he concluded.
At risk, after the hearing is the potential for litigation, splitting the Valley (District 3) and part of the Southeast (District 4) of the county.