HomeMy WebLinkAboutACLU 02-01-2022 ACW
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION
Southern California
February 1, 2021
Sent Via Email
Santa Ana City Council
22 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701
eComment&santa-ana.org
Re: Public Comment: Support for Santa Ana Redistricting Coalition Maps
February 1,2022, City Council Meeting,Agenda Item No. 16
Dear Members of the Santa Ana City Council:
The American Civil Liberties Union(ACLU)Foundation of Southern California supports SARC
Map V and SARC Map 2.2 As explained in more detail in the map narratives,the SARC maps were
created by community members throughout Santa Ana,including individuals served by Latino Health
Access, Orange County Environmental Justice (OCEJ),Orange County Congregation Community
Organization (OCCCO), and VietRISE. These organizations and their members form the Santa Ana
Redistricting Coalition(SARC). Both maps follow state and federal redistricting criteria that help ensure
that district lines are fair.Because the maps are legally compliant and are supported by ethnically and
geographically diverse residents in Santa Ana,we urge you to adopt SARC Map I or SARC Map 2.
The Fair and Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and Political Subdivisions Act(Fair Maps
Act)requires the City Council to, in order of priority: comply with the federal requirement that districts
be substantially equal in population, comply with Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act(VRA), and
create districts that are geographically contiguous,maintain communities of interest,have boundaries that
are easily identifiable and understandable by residents,and are compact. Cal. Elec. Code §§ 21621(a)-(c).
Both maps meet the federal requirements identified in the Fair Maps Act.See id. §§ 21621(a)&
(b). The districts in both draft maps are substantially equal in population. In both maps the total deviation
from the ideal population size is under 5%,well below the allowable 10%deviation. White v. Regester,
412 U.S. 755, 764(1976)(holding that deviations of under 10%are presumptively constitutional).
Section 2 of the VRA prohibits district lines that dilute the voting strength of minority communities. 52
U.S.C. § 10301(a).Neither SARC map impermissibly dilutes the Asian or Latino vote through packing or
cracking. The maps also do not violate the constitutional prohibition against racial gerrymandering. See
Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899, 905 (1996)(prohibiting the use of race as the predominant redistricting
factor absent a compelling government interest). While the SARC identified various communities of
SARC Map 1 submission and narrative is available at:https://publicdocs.santa-
ana.org/weblink/l,1,1,1,1,1,1,1.1/doc/130677/Pa eg l.aspx.
z SARC Map 2 submission and narrative is available at:https://publicdocs.santa-
ana.org/weblink/l,1,1,1,1,1,1,1.1/doc/130675/Pa eg l.aspx.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Hector 0.Villagra
CHAIR Marla Stone VICE CHAIRS Sherry Frumkin and Frank Broccolo
CHAIRS EMERITI Shari Leinwand Stephen Rohde Danny Goldberg Allan K.Jonas* Burt Lancaster' Irving Lichtenstein,MY Jarl Mohn
Laurie Ostrow* Stanley K.Sheinbaum*
*deceased
1313 WEST EIGHTH STREET • SUITE 200 • LOS ANGELES, CA 90017 • T 213.977.9500 • F 213.915.0220 • ACLUSOCAL.ORG
Page 2
interest that share an ethnic background,race did not predominate in the drawing of any map. Instead,the
SARC considered race as one of many factors. Other factors the SARC considered include compactness,
contiguity, and easily identifiable lines. The SARC also considered socioeconomic factors and shared
interests and concerns,including environmental justice issues,the prevalence of mobile home parks, and
income levels throughout the City.
The SARC maps comply with the Fair Maps Act's mandatory ranked redistricting criteria.Both
maps contain districts that are geographically contiguous. See Cal. Elec. Code § 21621(c)(1). The maps
also maintain several communities of interest. See id. § 21621(c)(2). Districts A,B,D, and F share largely
the same configuration in both maps and maintain distinct communities of interest.As discussed in
greater detail in the SARC map narratives, each of these communities have a series of interests and
concerns largely unique to them. Characteristics include,to name a few, a high number of mobile home
parks and shared restaurants and faith institutions in District A,more affluent and historic neighborhoods
in District B, a high number of mobile home parks and shared environmental justice concerns in District
D, and low-income,mixed immigration status households facing environmental justice issues in District
F. District F also keeps the Delhi neighborhood intact. There is a larger community of interest in the
southern core of the city that includes low-income,working-class, and mixed immigration status
households. In both configurations,these communities are captured by Districts E and C. The
northernmost part of this region,however,is also heavily impacted by environmental justice concerns.
This region is captured by District E in SARC Map I and by District C in SARC Map 2.Finally,both
map configurations create compact districts with borders that include major streets and landmarks and
will therefore be easily identifiable by residents. See id. § 21621(c)(2)-(3).
The Fair Maps Act and federal redistricting laws seek to ensure that maps are representative of
various communities within a jurisdiction. The SARC maps do precisely this. Through months of
community outreach and review of socioeconomic and environmental data,the SARC created two maps
that capture various communities of interest throughout the City, ensuring that all residents have an
opportunity to elect candidates of their choice. We urge you to adopt either SARC Map I or SARC Map
2. If you have any questions or concerns,you can reach us at cvalencia&aclusocal.org or
jg omezgaclusocal.org
Julia A. Gomez Cynthia Valencia
Staff Attorney Senior Policy Advocate and Organizer
ACLU Foundation of Southern California ACLU Foundation of Southern California
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA