Prop. 50 shows why California redistricting leaders need ethics rules | Opinion

Proposition 50 was a foregone conclusion from the moment it was placed on the ballot. Now that it is certified by the California Secretary of State, the question becomes: What should California do next regarding redistricting?

Commissioner guidelines

There is plenty to do. California must establish meaningful ethical guidelines for redistricting commissioners. These guidelines should mirror the California Code of Judicial Ethics that governs the political conduct of judges in our state. The last two redistricting cycles revealed serious problems that cannot be ignored if our process is to retain public trust

During the last election cycle, some commissioners communicated about internal business on social media platforms such as X and Facebook without disclosing those interactions.

A superior court judge is prohibited from privately discussing a pending case with an attorney because such communication undermines fairness and transparency. Judges speak through the record in open court where the public can see and evaluate the proceedings. That same principle should apply to redistricting commissioners.

Map drawing is not a minor administrative task — it directly affects political representation for millions of Californians, and it must occur in full public view.

Political campaigning

A second problem involved commissioners participating in political campaigns.

When Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the Prop. 50 campaign, a sitting redistricting commissioner, Sara Sadhwani, appeared with him and other supporters at a Los Angeles press conference. That conduct should not be permitted.

Commissioners are selected under a process that attempts to filter out partisan operators. Even the appearance of political activity undermines the integrity of the system. If a person exhibiting such behavior would be rejected as an applicant, then that behavior should be prohibited once the person is appointed.

Canon 5 of the California Code of Judicial Ethics states that a judge or a candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity or impartiality of the judiciary. Commissioners are not judges, yet they occupy a comparable position of trust. Their work shapes elections and therefore must be performed with the same expectation of neutrality.

True independence

There is another essential test for local governments and state leaders: Many local officeholders opposed Prop. 50 while publicly praising the concept of independent redistricting. If they truly believe in independent commissions, they should adopt them for their own cities and counties. If independence is a value worth defending at the state level, it should also be enacted at home.

The Legislature and the governor face a similar test. Both frequently praised the independent commission model and described it as central to public trust in elections. If they truly value the commission, they must fund it adequately and keep it active rather than letting it go dormant between cycles. A commission forced to restart from zero every time redistricting begins cannot perform its work effectively.

California needs redistricting commissioners who adhere to rules of conduct that inspire confidence rather than suspicion. These rules should include a prohibition on undisclosed communications about commission business, a clear ban on political campaign participation while serving public disclosure requirements for all outreach related to redistricting and ethics training modeled after that provided to judicial candidates.

Prop. 50 brought redistricting out of the shadows. Newsom gambled on a bet that voters would temporarily favor gerrymandered congressional districts throughout California in an effort to take back the House of Representatives as a challenge to President Donald Trump. Some media coverage suggested that early polling was uncertain. But the broader political climate made passage of Prop. 50 predictable.

The fight was never truly about the mechanics of redistricting in California. It became a proxy about Trump.

The passage of Prop. 50 changes the timing of congressional redistricting, while it remains in effect for state legislative races. The election underscored the importance of public trust in the people who draw the lines. California must strengthen that trust with ethical guidelines and genuine institutional support.

The system works only when commissioners act independently and when the state invests in their ability to do so.

Matt Rexroad is an attorney, a former Yolo County supervisor and a political consultant.