Orange County cities choose new redistricting maps

As of April 17, Orange County cities like Fullerton and Orange are adopting revised district maps for the next 10 years of elections following the release of the 2020 decennial census results. Graphic by HARRY LADA, Art Director

With the 2020 decennial census results being released to cities throughout the nation, local governments have spent the winter and spring holding public hearings to discuss where district boundaries should lie in preparation for the 2022 election. Fullerton, Lake Forest, Santa Ana and Buena Park are among some OC cities that voted on and finalized new maps by the April 17 deadline.

Federal, state and local governments revise district borders every 10 years in order to accommodate changes in population outlined by a decennial, federal census. At the local level, the partitioning of these districts is generally facilitated by the city council, though city residents can draft their own maps to submit to the city clerk as well as attend any public hearings.

“I’m very disappointed in the actions of the council and most of (Fullerton’s Redistricting Advisory Commission) for disregarding the community-drawn maps,” Kayla Asato, the redistricting campaign organizer for Orange County Environmental Justice (OCEJ), said at a March 29 public hearing. “The community drew a map with a 37-page rationale with data testimonies. All of that was ignored.”

While the city of Fullerton narrowly voted 3-2 April 5 to adopt Map 114 for the next decade, some city and county residents voiced their support for Map 110 and Map 112 throughout the four public hearings held by the city. The residents were also joined by members from three Orange County-based organizations: OCEJ, AHRI For Justice and Orange County Congregation Community Organization (OCCCO).

Prior to the start of the redistricting process, the residents had pleaded with the Fullerton City Council to create an independent redistricting commission that would remain as unbiased as possible when determining the new map for the city. Instead, the council decided to create the Redistricting Advisory Commission, which consisted of seven members that were all appointed by the city council members.

“We have come forward multiple times asking for multiple things such as an independent redistricting commission to hear our voices, have a more inclusive outreach program to consider the maps that we have put forward with a lot of work, and to be sure many of us have met each other and understand what we each have in common and what we feel would be best for our city,” resident Amena Qazi said.

Some of these residents signed a petition created prior to the council vote by Blandy Morales, the office manager and community organizer for OCCCO. The petition sought to urge Fullerton council members to vote in favor of Map 110, arguing that other drafts — like Map 114 — physically divide certain ethnic enclaves like the Korean, Muslim and Latino communities, splitting their votes among various districts instead of uniting the communities together.

“We urge the council to not diminish the renters’ voices by cracking them apart with the vertical north-south configurations of districts,” the petition stated.

However, this is not the first time Fullerton residents have disagreed with the city council’s decision to vote on a map the residents did not support. In 2016, Fullerton switched to district-based voting after facing lawsuits from two residents and their attorneys, who felt that the at-large electoral system did not represent minority communities fairly.

As a result of this switch, the city council members at the time chose a map that residents felt split up the downtown Fullerton community. The map had been submitted at the last minute by downtown business owners.

“(Voting for Map 110) is the council’s opportunity to show the residents of Fullerton that they can have a voice in the city again,” Morales’ petition wrote. “We can deliver the city to working people instead of the special interests that have dominated our politics for over a decade.” 

Fullerton Mayor Fred Jung, Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Whitaker and District 2 council member Nick Dunlap voted for Map 110. Jung told The Panther that although he had discussed Map 110 and Map 112 with the groups before the redistricting public hearings, he did not agree with the groups’ reasoning when it came to grouping apartments and multi-million dollar homes in the same district.

“That doesn’t make any sense, because while a portion of the district has a lot of apartments in it, the vast majority of that district that they cut out are single-family homes,” Jung said in a phone interview with The Panther. “So all of the reasoning that they put to me to (try) to convince me to vote for Map 110 and Map 112 just rang hollow, because it wasn’t justified.”

Jung said he felt Map 114 was a better option, since it has a distinct Asian district and two Hispanic districts.

“I think the vast majority of our community — the ones that just go to work, try to raise their children and try to lead healthy lives and be productive citizens — don’t have time to go to council meetings and vocalize their concerns,” Jung told The Panther. “I think by and large, (the majority of Fullerton residents) would have appreciated Map 114.”

Council members Jesus Silva and Ahmad Zahra, who represent Districts 3 and 5, respectively, voted against the map. In an email to The Panther, Zahra said he felt the redistricting process should have been more reliant on the recommendations of Fullerton’s Redistricting Advisory Commission (RAC), which was adopted in September 2021

“(Collaborating more with the RAC) would have facilitated a more community-driven map, minimized political biases and built better trust in the process,” Zahra said.

Meanwhile, the city of Westminster voted April 5 to choose Map 507 as its new district map. Three council members voted in approval of the map, while the remaining two abstained.

At a March 23 public hearing, resident Gabby Go voiced her support for Map 506 and Map 407, explaining to the city council members that the mock-up designs were crucial in fairly representing the city’s mobile home park residents — especially since these homes serve as one of Westminster’s few remaining affordable housing options when the cost of living in the city is 49% higher than the national average.

“Mobile home parks provide an indispensable service to the city’s low-income families,” Go said. “In order to support these communities and ensure their housing needs are met, the voices of mobile home park households must be heard and prioritized. Adopting these maps will be a step forward in that direction.”

Days later on March 22, the Orange City Council voted 6-1 for Map 128, despite resident support for other maps. Several residents did not support the map as it combined Districts 4 and 6, which have distinct differences from each other and would result in only one representative being assigned to both districts instead of two separate representatives.

“These two districts vary widely in terms of culture, lot sizes and issues,” resident Stephanie Lesinski wrote in an email to Pamela Coleman, Orange’s city clerk. “Housing large animals is not permitted in District 4 as it is in District 6. These are two distinct districts that deserve to be preserved.”

Other cities that chose their new district maps within the past month are Lake Forest, Buena Park and Newport Beach. Santa Ana will be voting for its new district map April 19.