With the 2020 local redistricting cycle concluded, this report takes a step back to evaluate the effectiveness of the FAIR MAPS Act and related Independent Redistricting Commission reforms at encouraging meaningful public participation and promoting the adoption of maps that better reflect and empower a jurisdiction’s diverse communities.

In particular, the report explores five key areas of the redistricting process — timing, transparency of the process, public participation in the process, line-drawing criteria, and the use of independent and advisory redistricting commissions — that significantly changed this cycle compared with prior cycles.

To read the report click here: https://bit.ly/3Y1TRFt

 

How, and by whom, new district lines are drawn after each census -- ie, the process of redistricting -- is central to the health of our democracy. 

As the executive summary of a just-released report, The Promise of Fair Maps, puts it:

[T}here is a shameful legacy extending through today, across the nation but also in California at the local level, of the redistricting process being abused. Instead of a tool for empowerment, local redistricting too often has been used by incumbents — who nearly always control the drawing of their own districts — to entrench their power, advance one political party or faction over another, or stop or limit the ability of growing communities of color from electing their own representatives to office.

This past redistricting season is the first in which the CA Fair Maps Act (FMA) has applied to local government bodies such as boards of supervisors and city councils.  (Congressional and CA state district lines have been drawn by the CA Independent Redistricting Commission since 2010.)

The FMA is intended to promote creation of districts that represent voters, not incumbents, and to increase public participation in the process of drawing district maps. 

The Promise of Fair Maps evaluates how well the new process achieved its goals and what improvements should be made.  The report is sponsored by the League of Women Voters of California along with other organizations and is based in part on reports from local League members who followed the redistricting process in their local governments.

Here are the main findings:

 

• TRANSPARENCY: FMA reforms made for a far more transparent local redistricting process, although some jurisdictions failed to follow notice and publication requirements

 

• PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: New redistricting rules and remote access policies significantly increased public and community engagement in the 2020 cycle

 

• CRITERIA: Better redistricting criteria sometimes led to better maps, but incumbency-protection remains the primary obstacle to fairer community representation

 

• COMMISSIONS: Independent Redistricting Commissions adopted maps that better reflected the interests of communities over incumbents

Recommendations for improving the FMA include:

• explicitly prohibiting the drawing of district lines in order to favor or discriminate against any incumbent,
• extending the FMA requirements to apply to all local governments, which would include school districts and other local bodies not currently covered.

The League of Women Voters of California as well as members of local leagues throughout the state have worked hard to support the changes made so far to redistricting in our state.  If you are interested in joining the Redistricting Online Discussion Group moderated by LWVC Director Helen Hutchison, please contact Julissa Rodriguez at jrodriguez [at] lwvc.org.