California’s proposed redistricting maps could split Sacramento in two. That can’t happen

If the maps released last week by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission remain unchanged, Sacramento would be divided between two representatives in Congress, and the dividing line between their jurisdictions would be just as dumbfounding as the idea itself. In the House of Representatives draft map, a peculiar zigzag halves the downtown grid, jumps the American River at Paradise Beach and narrowly keeps Sacramento State University’s campus under a single congressperson.

Ordinary citizens in this area may have missed the anxious response to the commission’s preliminary plans and the split-city possibility facing California’s capital. The proposed map breaks up numerous downtown alleyways, residential streets and even parts of the Sutter Medical Center complex. San Miguel and San Antonio ways in East Sacramento are inexplicably divided along F Street.

As the 14-member bipartisan commission advances into the final stretch of its service, drawing new boundaries for Congress, the state Legislature and the Board of Equalization on behalf of the citizenry, public comment and scrutiny have never been more important. Given how the first batch of maps were received in different swaths of California, there is much to be done to ensure our communities are not divided in this vital pursuit of equal representation.

Pairing dissimilar communities to avoid partisanship and force politicians into competition for our votes is an important outcome for the citizen-led redistricting effort. But it becomes a problem when neighbors are fragmented throughout Sacramento, one of the nation’s most diverse cities, as a result. Minimizing the splitting of communities is one of the commission’s main criteria, along with Voting Rights Act compliance and district contiguity.

In an effort to reflect population changes that would give San Joaquin County a single congressional district, commission members tossed out initial drafts and redrew the boundaries two days before they were approved and published on Nov. 10. Districts need to have equal populations, so the late-stage redo had ripple effects throughout Northern California, from Lake Tahoe to the Oregon border.

Splitting communities can have consequences for representation. In the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots in Los Angeles, for example, damaged businesses in Koreatown appealed to their representatives but were largely ignored because of how the area’s boundaries were drawn. An area of barely one square mile had been divided into four City Council districts and five in the state Assembly, leaving an Asian American community without proper representation.

While the effects may not be as dire for every politically divided city, jurisdictional conflicts could affect pandemic relief, business support, homelessness resources, infrastructure investments and other important federal services.

Fortunately, the Legislature and courts are no longer responsible for redistricting, and the Sacramento community has a chance to speak up and push the commission to redraw the boundaries before they’re finalized in December. Since California voters acted to remove partisan influence and increase public participation by empowering citizens through a 2008 ballot measure, our state has a more transparent and responsive process. Let’s take advantage before the Nov. 24 deadline for public comment.

There are still a few more days to contact the redistricting commission and advocate for new congressional boundaries that keep the city and region intact. There is no justifiable reason for Sacramento residents to share the same street but not the same elected representative.

This story was originally published November 18, 2021 at 2:00 PM.