California politicians used to joke that the state’s U.S. House delegation had less turnover than the Soviet Politburo. It’s funny because it’s true. Only once in 265 races from 2002 to 2010 did a district’s representation flip parties. Incumbents held onto all but one seat they vied for in a general election. That’s because like most politicians around the country, they controlled the maps laying out the boundaries of their districts. In 2010, California voters stripped lawmakers of their authority over redistricting, the once-a-decade process of redrawing congressional lines to account for demographic shifts, and awarded that power to an independent citizens’ panel. By the 2012 elections, the group’s work had done exactly what it was supposed to: create competition for seats that had long been safe. After the 53 new districts were revealed, 14 House members decided not to seek reelection or lost their race in November, resulting in a 26 percent turnover in the state’s delegation. “You’ve had voters shoehorned into districts for the sake of maintaining incumbency, and we aren’t doing that in California anymore,” says Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonpartisan advocacy group. “That’s probably what would happen everywhere if you had fair redistricting.” Legislators control the process in most states, using the centuries-old tradition of gerrymandering to ensure job security for politicians already in power. In every congressional race from 1964 to 2012, at least 85 percent of incumbents nationwide retained their seats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics and data compiled by Bloomberg. A handful of states—Iowa, Washington, Idaho, and Arizona among them—have undertaken redistricting reforms. Yet most continue to give party leaders some say over the final maps. New York’s legislature recently approved a constitutional amendment, which will go before voters in 2014, to create a 10-member redistricting commission. However, lawmakers would pick eight of its members. No state has come as close as California to getting partisan politics out of legislative mapmaking. Advocates for fair elections say the state’s reform could be a model for others, leading to more competitive races. And because representatives whose constituents are disproportionately Republican or Democratic are under less pressure to find middle ground on legislation, more competition could produce a House that’s much less polarized. At least theoretically. After a push by former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who clashed with the Democrat-controlled legislature, and GOP activist Charlie Munger Jr., a physicist and son of Berkshire Hathaway’s vice chairman, voters approved a 14-member citizens’ board to oversee maps for state and federal legislative districts. Under the aegis of the state auditor’s office, California allowed active voters continuously registered for five years with the same party (or as an independent) to apply. Lawmakers, public officials, and their immediate family members were ineligible. So were legislative aides, lobbyists, party staffers, and political donors who gave more than $2,000 in any year of the previous decade. More than 36,000 people submitted applications for the $300-a-day part-time positions. The agency pored over required essays and conducted interviews. Eventually, the state auditor randomly drew names of three Democrats, three Republicans, and two independents. That group then picked the remaining two Democrats, two Republicans, and two independents. Among those chosen: a retired high school principal, an architect, a chiropractor, and an independent bookstore owner. In February 2011 the full board set about drafting new boundaries. Its charter called for districts of roughly equal population with compact, regular shapes that respected city and county lines, as well as so-called communities of interest. That meant commissioners tried to group together people with shared economic and social features, such as race, religion, sexuality, commuting habits, and household income. “We thought about it the same way you would think about a neighborhood, what makes up a neighborhood,” says Commissioner Cynthia Dai, a consultant from San Francisco. The board wasn’t allowed to consider incumbents’ home addresses or look at voters’ party registration. It did take into account 20,000 written comments and testimony from more than 2,700 residents who spoke at several dozen public hearings. Based on their input, and under the guidance of an outside consultant who helped draw the lines, the panel released its new maps in August 2011. The number of districts didn’t change, but their boundaries were drastically different. The commissioners erased a skinny 200-mile-long district that Schwarzenegger had called the “Ribbon of Shame” because it was drawn to hug the central coastline, an area full of Democrats, and to exclude the right-leaning ranchers who lived inland. Ten incumbents were displaced, their homes newly located in districts where they’d have to square off against each other if they decided to run. That’s what happened to 15-term Congressman Howard Berman and his colleague of 15 years, Brad Sherman. Their homes in greater Los Angeles ended up in the same district, and the men almost came to blows during a debate as they fought for the seat last November. Sherman won. “The most offensive gerrymander of the last decade has been the preservation of white, liberal seats around Los Angeles to the downside of Latino seats,” says Rob Stutzman, a GOP consultant who served in Schwarzenegger’s administration. “The fact that you had Berman and Sherman drawn together is a great example of what should have been done a decade ago.” The panel combined territory from their old districts to create a new one composed mostly of Latinos. Democrat Tony Cardenas prevailed there, becoming the San Fernando Valley’s first Latino congressman. Democrats maintained their sizable edge. They won 38 seats, compared with 15 for Republicans. But Justin Levitt, an associate professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who runs a website tracking redistricting issues around the country, says the board stands as “the best example against the incumbent protection plan that was in place before,” because it’s driven by people who “don’t have incentives to pay back into the political system.” It will take another couple elections to know whether straighter lines on a map can keep sending entrenched politicians home.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-21/californias-redistricting-shake-up-shakes-out-politicians Kathay Feng California Common Cause Sent via BlackBerry

1) Status of Budget

a. CRC funding

CRC has received word that they have $24,000 to spend by June 30, 2013. Services have to be performed by end of fiscal year. Costs may include: – 1 new laptop, printer, 1 file cabinet. Yao, Ontai make a motion approved up to $3,000 for such expenses to be taken from 3 year fund, approved.

Additional costs to pay for may include: Q2 state archives, finalizing, translating and printing the report, pre-paying 1 year office space, pre-paying for URL and website, email accounts (C Shupe will check with DGS to see if this can be pre-paid).

Public comments: – Kathay Feng and Chris Carson said that it was important to keep the website up, as the most accessed public system. Feng said she would be talking with Malka Kopell to see whether the printing and translations could be covered or partially covered by one or some of the partners. – Jim Wright asked for searchable data. Ask for it from Q2. – Michael Wagaman said be prepared for $0 budget. Do not use one time funds for ongoing state expenses. For instance, for the website, you need a server and an IT person. Be cautious that you are spending money because you have money to spend.

2. FPPC Annual Filing.

CRC fall into group 1. Shupe asks for all Commissioners to complete the Form 700 by 3/15, and she will prepare them for submission by the 4/2 due date.

3. Sexual Harassment Training

The training must be done. Shupe informed Commissioners of available dates, including 2/28. Several Commissioners will send Shupe a copy of recent certificates for sexual harassment training they have received to see if these satisfy the state requirements.

4. Chair / Vice Chair.

Michelle made a motion to have Stan Forbes continue to have signing authority.

Vince Barraba made a motion and MIchelle DiGiulio seconded to keep Stan Forbes as Chair, Jeanne Raya as Vice Chair through February 12, 2014. Approved (Filkins-Webber voted no).

5. Operations A. 1800 number is now not in operation. Now people can call a listed cell or email. B. More regular mail goes to DGS where Shupe is. Mail box is still available.

Technical Advisory Discussion Topics

1. Update on Surveys 17 responses (some Commissioners who logged to compete part 2 have been counted twice)

2. Handbook Status DiGiulio reported that when the holidays hit, Gabino Aguirre has taken on the lion’s share of drafting. Aguirre reported that the draft includes an introduction, draft summary of survey responses as broken into the 5 phases of the redistricting process. There is a section of Suggestions (as opposed to Recommendations). All Commissioner responses will be in the Appendix. Additionally, Aguirre proposed rolling the reports of Raphe Sonenshein for LWV and Malka Kopell/Kathay Feng’s report capturing the recommendations of the partners in the same document, possibly in the appendix. Yao, Blanco, Ancheta would like the Commissioners’ report to be separate, line should be drawn to maintain independence, with a clear and distinct voice. Commissioners may provide feedback to Aguirre and DiGiulio, whether they are on the right track. Blanco asks if the document should be called a “handbook”, and suggests there should be time for input from all Commissioners. Aguirre and DiGiulio thinks they will have a good draft in 60 days, April 15.

Public Comment: Kathay Feng recognized the important discussion about the CRC keeping an independent voice. Malka and she had originally offered their time to assist Aguirre and DiGiulio in researching, drafting, or writing the handbook. Feng suggested that besides these offers of assistance, the CRC might consider whether it needs help with graphics layout, printing, or translation, where the content is not affected. She also suggested that the Handbook should include all reports or public comments that came in before drafting began in an appendices. Jim Wright reminded the Commission that he provided such public comments and filled out the survey.

Public Information Discussion Topics Shupe reported that 1300 people are still signed up to receive the CRC’s emails, with a high 31% open rate. Commissioners Forbes and Raya have handled media inquiries (mostly to do with people who live in districts with caretaker representatives, and Austin’s new system modeled after California). Shupe has fielded standard inquiries, including where to find the district maps and other inquiries about information that is already publicly available.

Public Comment Wagaman has appointed caretaker representative by the Senate Rules Committee. The appointments and the process is available on the Senate website. Feng suggested that CRC might draft a paragraph that explains why there are portions of the population that have caretaker Senators, how this happens every 10 years, and how the Commission chose the district numbers to minimize this problem.

Shupe invited any recommendations to change or correct website information.

Legal Advisory Discussion Topics 1. Ward Connerly Case. The court has decided against plaintiffs and upheld the selection process. The period for appeal is still open, thogh Angelo Ancheta reported that AG Dan Powell has not received notice of any appeals. Kathay Feng California Common Cause Sent via BlackBerry

Redistricting shakes up California House races

LOS ANGELES—California’s redrawn political map opened the door this year to the priciest and hardest-fought House races in decades, forcing incumbents to fight for their jobs, ousting the state’s longest-serving congressman and leaving several contests undecided Wednesday. Even as most veterans of California’s largest-in-the-nation congressional delegation prepared to return to Washington, others, such as long-time GOP moderate Rep. Mary Bono Mack, dug in to defend seats as Democrats pulled ahead in a handful of retooled, suburban districts.

Returns trickling back Wednesday showed Democrats maintained a slight edge in races in the Sacramento, Palm Springs and San Diego areas, with only absentee ballots left to count.

“Because of redistricting, candidates were facing substantially new constituencies this year,” said Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College. “There were some survivors but overall the big losers are the Republicans, who were also dealing with some serious headwinds from the top of the ticket.”

Rep. Pete Stark, who had represented his San Francisco Bay area district since the end of the Vietnam War, was one of two Democrat casualties unseated by members of their own party in House races reshaped by an independent redistricting committee.

Stark, 80, lost to an upstart challenger nearly 50 years his junior, Democratic Dublin City Councilman Eric Swalwell.

He was undone in part due to a new primary

system that sends the top two vote-getters to the November ballot, forcing runoffs in some cases between party brethren. That also ended the House career of 30-year Democratic Rep. Howard Berman in the San Fernando Valley of Los Angeles, where Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman netted the single seat left after the district’s boundaries were redrawn.

Their nasty battle even got physical when Sherman roughly grabbed the smaller, older Berman by the shoulder during a debate, pulled him toward his chest and hollered, “You want to get into this?”

State congressional races drew intense interest nationally, after gerrymandered strongholds were transformed into free-for-alls flooded with campaign cash from groups as varied as Planned Parenthood and Americans for Tax Reform, headed by low-tax crusader Grover Norquist.

Super PACs and other outside groups flooded California’s House races with more money than any other state under new rules allowing unrestricted outside political spending. By Tuesday, spending had reached nearly $54 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Investing in California’s congressional races helped Democrats reduce the GOP majority in the House and bring in new members who represent the state’s increasing diversity, said Andy Stone, spokesman for the House Majority Pac, the leading Democratic super PAC in this year’s races.

Three House races remained hotly contested Wednesday afternoon as returns showed Democratic challengers maintaining a razor-thin edge.

In the suburbs south of Sacramento, GOP Rep. Dan Lungren was struggling to fend off Democratic physician Ami Bera, who held a slight advantage with only absentee ballots left to count. His GOP colleagues Reps. Brian Bilbray of San Diego and Bono Mack of Palm Springs also were trailing, returns showed.

In the rural San Joaquin Valley, freshman Republican Rep. Jeff Denham staved off his Democratic challenger, former astronaut Jose Hernandez. The district, split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, attracted more than $8 million from political action committees and other outside groups.

Democratic Reps. Jerry McNerney in Stockton and Lois Capps in Santa Barbara kept their seats, defeating well-funded GOP opponents.

Democratic Rep. John Garamendi, who has held state and federal offices for nearly four decades, trounced Kim Vann, a 37-year-old pro-abortion rights Colusa County supervisor who national Republicans had considered a top hope for picking up a seat.

One exception among the incumbents was Stark. The lawmaker had coasted to re-election in his liberal Northern California enclave since he was elected in 1972, until more moderate suburbs were included in his district. Swalwell’s pledge for fresh ideas and bipartisan cooperation played better with voters.

“I went to Washington by running against an unpopular war and for women’s rights, opportunity for children and dignity for seniors,” said Stark, who congratulated Swalwell on Wednesday. “I leave knowing that the landscape has changed, but the needs of my constituents remain.”

The state’s delegation has been composed of 33 Democrats and 19 Republicans, with the seat of former Democratic Rep. Dennis Cardoza up for grabs next year after he resigned in August when the fall ballot was already set.

Democrat Mark Takano of Riverside, a high school teacher and former trustee of the Riverside Community College District, won a seat in the newly redrawn 41st District, once a GOP stronghold held by Rep. Jerry Lewis. Democratic state Assemblywoman Julia Brownley snapped up another seat along the Ventura County coastline that had been held by Republican Rep. Elton Gallegly, who retired.

Districts south and west of Los Angeles were some of the hottest battlegrounds, where Bono Mack sought to fend off Harvard-educated physician Raul Ruiz, an effective Democratic fundraiser adept at mobilizing the district’s growing swath of Hispanic voters.

San Diego’s 52nd district, where Bilbray is trying to fend off Democratic challenger Scott Peters, remained a tossup Wednesday afternoon.

As of Tuesday, outside groups had spent nearly $8.3 million on the race, making it the nation’s sixth-most expensive in terms of outside spending. By comparison, the campaigns together had spent $4.1 million through Sept. 30, the most recent figures available.

That’s a lot of negatives, but what it means is: “Never mind what we said before, vote Yes.”

If a majority of voters vote YES on the Referendum, Prop. 40, the Commission-drawn Senate maps will stay in effect. Here’s what the SacBee reported, in greater detail. Attached is the actual Ballot Argument from the No camp.

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/07/redistricting-measure-proposition-40-backers-throw-in-the-towel-wont-seek-passage.html

Happy Rest of the Summer!

Kathay Feng Executive Director California Common Cause

Please note that we will be moving our LA office to 453 S. Spring Street, Suite 401, Los Angeles, CA 90013 as of September 2012.

No on 40 Ballot Argument.pdf

The amended bill is in print now: http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1051-1100/sb_1096_bill_20120412_amended_sen_v97.pdf . The committee’s analysis isn’t posted yet.   Trudy Schafer League of Women Voters of California 916-442-7215   Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

How do I find out the “new” districts for several properties that we own? In addition, are the “new” districts in effect now or at a later date?

Answer:

You can go to the this LA Times link to find the districts you live in: http://www.latimes.com/news/la-redistricting-map-july-2011,0,3633335.htmlstory#37.42166,-119.27199999999999,6,usCongress,,,current

This link can also be found from the official website: www.wedrawthelines.com, go to the “Maps” button. You have the choice of viewing the districts across the state, zooming in through a google maps tool, or looking it up on the LA Times tool.

Through LA Times’ site, you can type in your address and the side by side map will show you what districts the address is in. The map on the left is the “current” map (2001 lines). These lines are in effect through the end of 2012. The state and congressional candidates who are running in the 2012 June and November elections are running for the “new districts” or the 2011 lines.

When are the new districts in effect? Technically, they are in effect for the candidates who are running in those districts, and really in effect when someone is elected to represent that district – so, they are in effect… now. There is an overlap period at the beginning of each candidate when the old and new districts are both in effect until people are elected to the new districts.

But it gets just a little more complicated. There is a referendum of the 2011 (“new”) Senate lines on the November 2012 ballot so there is a possibility (depending on how California voters vote) that those lines will or won’t be the lines that are in place for the rest of the decade. Since the 2011 lines for the State Assembly and congressional districts have not been challenged by referendum (and they have been twice upheld by the CA Supreme Court), we will be using the State Assembly and congressional lines drawn by the Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2011 through the end of the decade (up to 2021, at least).

Whew! Hope that helps!

-Kathay Feng

California Common Cause

(213) 252-4552

U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Wilson has dismissed with predudice litigation filed against the California Citizens Redistricting Commission’s Congressional maps.

“Once again the work of the Citizens Redistricting Commission has been affirmed against baseless partisan attacks. California voters created the Citizens Redistricting Commission in order to get partisan politics out of drawing legislative and Congressional districts. The Federal Court has found that the Commission’s process complied with the law and was fair and representative,” said current Commission Chair Jeanne Raya..

“The Commission has now won five matters in a row. There are no outstanding claims against the Commission and the districts it created,” said James Brosnahan one of the lawyers representing the Citizens Redistricting Commission.

2012.02.09 Civil Minutes – General (Order to Dismiss).pdf

Jim Brosnahan, one of the lawyers who argued for the Commission, said “These fourteen citizens have done a tremendous job in a selfless and objective way and have created a precedent that not only enriches the California political system but may be used in other states in the years ahead.”