More letters on SLO County redistricting: Is Patten map a ‘fiasco’ or does it right a wrong?
It’s gerrymandering
On Nov. 19 I attended the Board of Supervisors meeting on redistricting maps. There was a well-orchestrated group that supported the Patten map, which is the definition of gerrymandering. Maps A or B were supported by the majority of speakers that day.
The finale came when the comment period concluded and the attendees were yelled at by an angry Supervisor John Peschong, who decided only the Patten map and Map C should be considered. His rant apparently stemmed from an email received from someone critical of issues that have occurred in Paso Robles.
The room was stunned by this inappropriate behavior. The chairwoman remained silent.
When she finally spoke, Lynn Compton discounted an anti gerrymandering appeal she received from a group called Citizens to Protect District 4, saying she had her aide check the political party of each person who signed it, and it included too many Democrats. Earlier in the day she said she would never check a district to find the political leanings of its residents.
Which is it? Remember Ms. Compton, per the state Constitution, the BOS is nonpartisan.
We deserve supervisors who listen to county residents, regardless of their political leanings. We deserve better than Compton and Peschong.
Linda Reynolds, Nipomo
Lost cause?
After spending all day attending and watching the Nov. 19 redistricting meeting I was deeply disturbed that the majority board members chose to ignore public comments supporting Maps A and B and blocked any attempt to include them for final consideration. It appears the Patten map may have been predetermined by the majority to be the board’s choice and all others blocked from meaningful consideration.
It appears any further participation in this process is a waste of time and energy given that the final outcome appears to be a foregone conclusion. To not even allow Map A or B to make the final cut to three seems to be a dereliction of duty.
Tom Shumard, San Luis Obispo
Partisan divide
The Nov. 16, 2021, Tribune Viewpoint by Jim Gardiner and Rick Terborch articulates the urgent need for civic engagement and awareness of what’s at stake with the redistricting process.
The recent census has revealed minor changes in population in our county. That knowledge tells us that the current district lines remain fully compliant with election laws in that they maintain fair and balanced geography, population, communities of interest and party registration. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that there is no need to make a change.
However, Supervisors Lynn Compton, John Peschong and Debbie Arnold have a history of resisting nonpartisan and reasonable logic and tend to brush aside policies and processes benefiting the people of SLO County in favor of advancing their own political agendas.
The board majority’s decision to forego appointing a nonpartisan citizens’ panel to advise on drawing the district boundaries is cause for concern given their track record. Redistricting is about the welfare of the people – not politics. It is therefore imperative that “We the people of SLO County” speak up on our own behalf. When it comes to decisions about this county’s future, we cannot continue to condone partisan divide that suppresses the welfare of the populous.
Kimberly Gravell, Nipomo
Redistricting “fiasco”
This whole SLO County redistricting plan is a complete fiasco. First, it’s unnecessary as our population has not changed enough to warrant it. Second, the whole idea of even considering the Patten map is ridiculous. The map ignores geography and communities of interest except for the city of SLO.
The most laughable comment was from Lynn Compton when she said it “defies logic” not to view San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly as communities of interest. While that may be true, at the same time she’s totally OK with splitting up Los Osos and Morro Bay into different districts?
How in the world are they not “communities of interest”? They’re within spitting distance of each other, share the same shoreline of an estuary, and the same junior high and high schools. Instead, Los Osos is lumped with … Grover Beach? And Morro Bay with SLO? Not to mention Atascadero is split off from Templeton and instead is in the same district as … Cambria?
Richard Patten, what the heck were you drinking when you came up with this and what were the supervisors drinking when they decided to accept this joke of a map?
Oh wait, never mind, I know what they were drinking … the Kool-Aid.
Dean Thompson, Los Osos
In (partial) agreement
I wholeheartedly agree with former police chiefs Jim Gardiner’s and Rick TerBorch’s thinking (Tribune, Nov.16) that it is incumbent upon each citizen to become more vigilant and actively “engage in the practice of democracy” by being heard in a respectful and civil manner.
However, I cannot agree that there is anything “radical” about the process of reconsidering and/or re-drawing county district boundaries. Perhaps there is no legal requirement to change boundaries based on minor changes in population, but that does not mean that the county’s current boundaries conform to the criteria set forth for drawing district lines or that we should not take the opportunity to re-think them at this time.
Any redrawing of county boundaries must be developed based on the criteria established for doing so and make sense based on cities’ socio-economic profiles today. For these reasons, I urge everyone to consider Richard Patten’s Rev. 1 proposed citizens’ map and recommend its adoption. It adheres to all criteria established for drawing district lines, communities of interest would be geographically compact, fair and nonpolitical, and far better represents a united county than what is currently in place. Radical? I think not.
Joette Eisengart, Shell Beach
Don’t make SLO an island
The county’s own website specifies that “…districts shall not be drawn for purposes of favoring or discriminating against an incumbent, political candidate, or political party.”
The proposed redistricting is a blatant attempt to protect the representatives of the Republican Party and marginalize diverse interests, and it must be stopped. The proposed changes leave SLO City District without assets of importance in the county’s jurisdiction. (Diabolo Power Plant, Price Canyon, SLO County airport would all be redistricted!) Changes are NOT mandated given our current population growth, and there is no real need to move the district lines.
SLO City would become a tiny island in our county! Leave the current districts as they are preserving communities of interest and providing our residents with more equitable representation for our shared assets. Demand that others call this out for what it really is, a long-term, ultra-conservative power grab.
Deborah Cleere, San Luis Obispo
Shapes matter
The shape of districts matters because their borders determine who votes in an election — and if drawn in certain ways, a district could artificially inflate or restrict the representation of a group of voters of common interest. The conservative troika led by John Peschong essentially plans to game the system. They espouse election integrity yet they want anything but. With redistricting, the conservative supervisors want to pick the voters, rather than having the voters pick their representatives so as to maintain their hegemony.
Trump says “Republicans would ‘never’ be elected again if it was easier to vote.”
The redistricting plan to carve up the current districts to favor current supervisors such as Lynn Compton, who sees her constituency ebbing, is clearly right out of Trump’s play book.
Laurance Shindeman, Nipomo
Hijacked process
The troika of Compton, Arnold and Peshong are now looking at how they can carve up the county to ensure their continued dominance over the board, Compton’s re-election and potentially pushing Bruce Gibson out of office.The process of redistricting is now front and center in SLO County; what has historically been a nonpartisan process has now been hijacked by the county Board of Supervisors and turned into a political football.
In a recent editorial, the San Luis Obispo Tribune opined on the politicization of the redistricting process and quoted Mike Brown, executive director of COLAB, “The biggest threat to conservative and rational values comes from some city of SLO precincts, Cal Poly Precincts, Oceano and some of the large planned golf communities in Nipomo.”
Herein lies the heart of the conservative agenda and the reasoning behind the Board of Supervisors decision to take control of the redistricting process rather than trust it to a non-partisan committee. Political gain rather than fair representation is clearly their mantra. Redistricting is supposed to be a nonpartisan process. Absent facts to support redistricting, the nonpartisan approach would be to retain the status quo and support Plan A.
Jack Moyer, Nipomo
Pick Patten’s
The only map that that follows the rules is citizen Richard Patten’s map. SLO is no longer divided into three districts. It keeps SLO and CalPoly — communities of interest — together. Cal Poly in District 1 is not contiguous. It also allows Oceano and Grover Beach, which share a sewer, fire department and school district to be together. Why should SLO have the benefit of three supervisors?
Sheila Dallas, Arroyo Grande
Rebutting the chiefs
The recent opinion piece from the two retired police chiefs must be answered.
I could have sworn that Tom Fulks wrote this masterpiece. Calling themselves Republicans while spewing the Democrat talking points is suspicious. What the heck do the Jan. 6 insurrection, Tommy Gong and “free and fair elections” have to do with drawing a redistricting map?
They know full well it’s a process that is completed every 10 years and the citizens of each county have plenty of opportunities to weigh in. The supervisors were delayed in their process because the data depends on the census. The census was delayed because of COVID.
I do not understand the comment that by keeping the district lines unchanged, this will “quell the rage”? What does that even mean? If certain supervisors vote the wrong way there will be rioting in the streets? Ridiculous.
It is the supervisors’ prerogative to appoint a nonpartisan citizens panel or not. I’d rather all of the citizens of the county weigh in on the maps and our representatives vote accordingly.
If you have an opinion on the redistricting, write to your supervisor, attend the meetings. But talking about conspiracies and rage has nothing to do with redistricting.
Terri Stricklin, Nipomo
Get involved
On Nov. 19 at 9 a.m. the Board of Supervisors will hold a third public hearing on redistricting. They will consider whether to keep the current district maps virtually intact or to make significant changes to the district lines. The final district maps will be in place for 10 years, until the next census in 2030.
This matters because the changes could drastically alter the composition of districts and affect residents’ ability to elect the supervisors of their choice.
Two of the district maps under consideration keep the current districts mostly unchanged. Other maps make major changes: moving Cambria and San Simeon into a district with Paso Robles; putting Oceano in the same district as Grover Beach and Pismo Beach; making the city of San Luis Obispo one district, with one representative on the five-member board.
While equal population distribution is the first criteria the board must consider, they must also respect “communities of interest” to the extent practicable. A “community of interest” is defined as populations that share common social or economic interests. We urge residents who share a “community of interest” to study the proposed maps at SLO County Maps and to attend the November 19 hearing in person or submit public comment to the board.
The League of Women Voters of San Luis Obispo County is committed to ensuring that this process results in fairly determined districts where election outcomes reflect the will of the electorate.
Cindy Marie Absey, President
League of Women Voters of San Luis Obispo County
This story was originally published November 19, 2021 at 6:45 AM.