SLO County supervisors narrow redistricting maps to 2 finalists — here’s how they look
The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors has narrowed its redistricting maps down to two options — one backed by the local Republican party and another put forward by the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce.
Hundreds of residents packed the Friday redistricting hearing, which boiled down to a battle between those who want to significantly change the election map and those who want it to remain the same.
The meeting drew an overflow crowd to the board chambers in downtown San Luis Obispo. The room was so full that Supervisor Lynn Compton, the board chair, repeatedly had to ask people to move out of the aisles, citing fire codes.
Public comment took up the majority of the meeting, which began at 9 a.m. and lasted into the evening. More than 100 people commented.
Which maps did supervisors pick?
County staff wanted supervisors to pick up to three maps for consideration at the final redistricting hearing on Nov. 30. Supervisors voted 4-1 to put forward two maps, with Supervisor Dawn Ortiz-Legg casting the lone dissenting vote.
As one finalist, the board selected a map drawn by Arroyo Grande resident Richard Patten, which is backed by the county Republican Party. His map would dramatically redraw the county’s supervisor districts by splitting the current North Coast into three pieces.
Los Osos would be in one district, Morro Bay in another, and Cayucos, Cambria and the rest of the region would be in a district with Atascadero.
Patten’s map would divide the city of San Luis Obispo between two supervisors instead of three. The city would not be represented wholly by one person, as has been the refrain of the plan’s supporters.
The northern two-thirds of the city, including downtown and Cal Poly, would be combined in a thin ribbon of a district stretching out the Chorro Valley to Morro Bay.
In addition, Patten’s map would also separate Oceano from Nipomo in a district that straddles Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant and runs from the southern end of Pismo Beach to the edge of Morro Bay State Park. It also includes the Laguna Lake and airport areas of San Luis Obispo.
A change in the North County would group Santa Margarita with Templeton and Paso Robles, rather than neighboring Atascadero.
Click here to see a zoom-able version of Patten’s map.
For the second finalist, Supervisors picked a map drawn by the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce, which the organization calls the “SLO County 2030 map.”
The Chamber’s map is similar to the current layout in that it maintains the North Coast in one district, splits San Luis Obispo among three supervisors and keeps Oceano with Nipomo.
However, it would also split Atascadero into two districts.
Click here to see a zoom-able version of the Chamber map.
What did supervisors say about the map selection?
Supervisor John Peschong made the motion to put forward the two final maps, and Supervisor Debbie Arnold seconded it.
However, Supervisors Bruce Gibson and Dawn Ortiz-Legg both strongly objected to Patten’s map. Gibson tried to encourage the board to add the Plan B map to its selection, but all except Ortiz-Legg declined to do so.
Gibson said he doesn’t want to see the North Coast broken up. He also accused the map of “packing” Democrats into the San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay district to lessen their influence throughout the county.
“Any map that fractures that (North Coast) community of interest has to bear the burden of truth that there were no other alternatives,” Gibson said.
Ortiz-Legg pointed out that Patten’s map creates a district dominated by two cities with few unincorporated communities for that supervisor to represent. She said that would leave one supervisor to manage the communities of Los Osos, Avila Beach and Oceano, diluting the voices of some residents.
“It’s very important that we represent these districts, the unincorporated areas ... as best as possible and give these folks a voice,” Ortiz-Legg said. “And what happens on the Patten map is kind of the opposite.”
Compton said it “defies logic” not to view San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly as communities of interest.
“Cal Poly students ... interact in the community that work in the restaurants, the shops that are here in San Luis Obispo,” Compton said. “They live in the town, they reside in homes that are owned by San Luis Obispo residents. That should stay together — it shouldn’t be broken up three, four, five ways.”
Patten map supporters push to keep most of SLO in one district
The hours of comment on Friday turned into a debate between supporters of Patten’s map and those who urged the board to adopt Plans A or B, which keep the district boundaries similar to their current format.
Fans of Patten’s map said they want to see San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly isolated in one district, even though his plan still divides the city into two representation areas.
He presented his plan at a series of local Republican Party trainings in early November, and a group of Patten map supporters turned out at the Friday meeting.
Commenter Linda Becker and other Patten map supporters said they didn’t understand why a portion of San Luis Obispo is in District 5, which is primarily a North County area.
“Cal Poly students must be kept intact as a community of interest,” Becker said. “Why are some Cal Poly students assigned District 5, way up the Grade? ... After studying all the maps, I support the map that complies with all the criteria. It’s fair, it’s balanced and that’s the Richard Patten map. It’s time to stop the power grab of San Luis Obispo city.”
Greg Grewal of Creston also favored the Patten map, pointing to what he said were errors committed in the previous redistricting process in 2011.
“Cut the cancer out, correct the problems that were done (10 years ago),” he said.
North County resident Alan Duckworth said he believes he lives in a gerrymandered district in Paso Robles. “It is broke and it does need to be fixed,” he said, supporting the Patten map.
Patten, himself, claimed his map best follows California redistricting guidelines and minimizes community breakups.
“The Richard Patten map again proves SLO County communities of interest need no divisions,” Patten said.
Residents push to keep supervisor district status quo
However, other speakers pushed the supervisors to maintain the current district boundaries and select Plans A or B.
Plan A supporters, like Gibson, said putting most of San Luis Obispo in one district would pack a large concentration of Democratic voters into one area, decreasing their influence throughout the county.
Linda Robertson of San Luis Obispo said the idea of combining Cal Poly and SLO into one district amounted to caverning and was the “essence of gerrymandering.”
North Coast residents said they don’t want to see District 2 broken up or shifted into a representation area with the North County.
Karen Pearson of Cambria supported Map A.
“Cambria is a North Coast town,” Pearson said. “When you put us in with the Patten map ... it totally separates us. ... The Patten map does not do anything for us.”
She also said she did not see how other areas have been harmed by the current map: “Has there been something wrong with the way San Luis is right now?”
Susan Devine, a San Luis Obispo resident, emphasized keeping the map geographically contiguous and maintaining communities of interest.
“By placing SLO in one district, you isolate the city. ... What’s being proposed appears to be unlawful and partisan ...” she said. “Follow the law. Don’t waste time and money on this endeavor.”
Richard Berg, 20-year resident of the 4th District, objected to removing Oceano from that district.
“There’s no need for districts to change, because the populations are balanced. ... There’s no problem.” He said he objected to supervisors “manipulating” borders to improve their chances for election.
Why is SLO County drawing new election maps?
The county is in the midst of redrawing the election boundaries around the supervisors’ five representation areas. The redistricting process occurs every 10 years to adjust boundaries with the release of new U.S. Census data that may show population shifts.
Supervisors’ districts must have approximately equal numbers of people, so redrawing the districts is sometimes necessary to ensure the representation areas are balanced.
The county’s population has not changed enough to legally require many significant changes to the current supervisor map, according to Redistricting Partners, the county’s map-making consultant.
This story was originally published November 19, 2021 at 8:22 AM.
