Town Square

Post a New Topic

Public hearing on county redistricting

Original post made by [removed] on Jun 23, 2011

Dear Editor,

A Reminder to your readers: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing, June 28, 2011, at 1PM, at Board Chambers, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez California. Supervisors will consider redistricting maps and all public input, map proposals, map concepts intended to redraw boundaries to make districts equal in population and holding a commonality of residents' interests.

Comments (4)

Posted by [removed], a resident of Alamo
on Jun 24, 2011 at 11:09 am

Dear Editor,

Let's update your readers with news service discoveries that answer concerns about the openness of supervisors' consideration of Contra Costans' input during redistricting workshops. Your readers among regional neighborhoods became concerned when various supervisor's supporters started circulating new maps and new plans for establishing district boundaries in Contra Costa County that serve the political future of each supervisor. Further, competing maps and plans were circulated by political parties to support new candidates for supervisors' seats in 2012 primary elections. Each of those actions must be recognized as political campaigns and not barometers for supervisors' redistricting decisions

If your readers review the specifications of the redistricting process there are several criteria that must be met to certify any redistricting ordinance passed by the supervisors. First, there has to be nearly equal population in each district. Second, there must be a demonstration of commonality of interests such as linkage of communities, transportation corridors, in-common service districts, and a majority of residents in favor of such inclusive boundaries. Third, the supervisors' ordinance is subject to review by the state and potential court challenges by citizens or groups.

Fourth, and likely most important, we are now entering a national election campaign that will include election of three supervisors. Thus, a majority of supervisors know they are being judged by their current actions and need to demonstrate fairness in establishing district boundaries to retain support by voters. Certainly the redistricting process allows supervisors' to choose their voters but their choices, if unpopular, could turn voters against them as candidates.

24/680 south corridor audit teams attended redistricting workshops in districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 to specify the majority of residents interests in being a district in Contra Costa County without division or separation. The next step for communities, cities, neighborhoods and individual residents is to continue presentation during the public hearing, June 28th, in Martinez. If the supervisors see a lack of participation then the final ordinance will more likely reflect political decisions than the will and interests of the residents, as voters, in the resulting districts.


Posted by Rick Pshaw, a resident of Alamo
on Jun 27, 2011 at 3:24 pm

The reality is that there are NO criteria or specifications that the supervisors must meet. They can do whatever they want to set district boundaries. Of course, there may be court challenges and lawsuits but it would be extremely difficult to reverse any BOS decision on this matter.

Just look at the current boundaries to see if they were sensitive to any mythical criteria 10 years ago...


Posted by [removed], a resident of Alamo
on Jun 27, 2011 at 4:50 pm

Dear Editor,

LONG-TERM PARKING IN MARTINEZ

Special thanks to Martinez Chamber of Commerce for directions to long term parking. Audit teams, neighborhood groups and individuals from throughout the county can find long term parking without running out to feed the meters along Court Street.

The parking lot at the old train station provides 10 hour metered parking on Vista between Ferry and Court Street. Free parking is offered north across the tracks via Ferry, right turn on Joe Street to parking along Dimaggio Drive near the Bocce courts.


Posted by [removed], a resident of Alamo
on Jun 28, 2011 at 5:06 pm

Dear Editor,

BANG researchers and editors provided an excellent review of the public hearing noting the selfish interests of three supervisors have initially blocked a rational and legal redistricting process. Our own supervisor, Mary Piepho, supported by Karen Michoff, has proposed the uncommon linkage of Walnut Creek, Clayton and the Delta Region with the obvious legal issue of lack of community commonality and actual population balance.

Should your readers have expected anything different? Are they celebrating because Mary Piepho does not want a role in the 680 south corridor?

Please invite readers' commentary.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Anti-fracking folks rail against railroads
By Tim Hunt | 36 comments | 958 views

Moneyball, the Sequel: Billy Beane for President!
By Tom Cushing | 6 comments | 711 views

Spedowfski Announces run for Livermore City Council
By Roz Rogoff | 1 comment | 686 views

Be an Exhibitionist!
By John A. Barry | 5 comments | 284 views