With new census data in hand, Orange leaders have begun the once-a-decade process of adjusting voting boundaries, but some residents are concerned the existing district representing the El Modena neighborhood and communities west of the 55 Freeway could be split up, possibly diluting the voice of the Latino residents in the area.
With nearly 20 maps submitted before a public hearing last month, the City Council is now focusing on four to consider further. Only one of those proposes keeping the existing District 5 – stretching from South Tustin Avenue to Hewes Avenue – intact.
Sam Rodriguez, whose family has lived in the historic El Modena enclave for generations, called the proposals that split up District 5 “a power grab,” saying the maps “gerrymander, and they dilute the Latino vote.”
But city officials note the council has not declared a vote on any particular map, and residents can still submit proposals through the end of the month for consideration.
From cities up through Congress, the recent federal census has kicked off required redistricting efforts to adjust boundaries in order to even out the representation of populations.
Between the 2010 and 2020 census counts, Orange, along with many California cities, was challenged for how its representatives were chosen. As the result of a lawsuit over its at-large voting system, the city moved to a by-district election process, where council members are selected by voters in their district, instead of by all voters citywide. The idea is a smaller voting area creates the opportunity for minority communities to gain representation and makes campaigning for council a less expensive prospect.
With the new census data, the council is looking now at adjustments to the six districts that were created – the mayor is still chosen by all voters.
Rodriguez said he reached out to Malibu-based attorney Kevin Shenkman after the council’s December meeting, concerned about the possibility District 5 would be split, losing ground made in giving the Latino community a voice in city government. Shenkman, who sued the city in 2019 over its at-large election system, sent a letter to Orange’s city attorney last week, saying the three maps proposing to break up the district would “significantly reduce the Latino proportion.”
The three proposed maps would reduce the voting-age Latino population in the district to closer to 30%, he said. Leaving District 5 as is would create a 59% Latino majority, 40% of whom are voting age, he said.
Shenkman stopped short of threatening the city with legal action in his letter, but he said recent elections resulted in a Latina member on the council from the district, Ana Gutierrez, and he hoped Orange “will not attempt to reverse that progress by diluting the Latino vote in this new round of redistricting.”
Rodriguez said “prior to the lawsuit, we would have never had a chance to run a Latina or Latino from the barrio.”
“The city has been playing games, because they want to retain power,” Rodriguez said. “They think that they can change the maps here and there for the next election.”
Gutierrez noted the city’s leaders have not yet voted on a final map, but said in a text message she “will abide by the laws that regulate this process” and hopes other council members do the same. Voting rights law prohibits diluting the voice of a minority group, such as through deliberately splitting up – or packing – a district.
Mayor Mark Murphy said at least some existing district boundaries will likely change because of population growth in District 1 between the last census and now, which will need to be evened out.
“Some of that population has got to go somewhere, and it may affect all the districts, it may affect the majority of them,” he said. “I just don’t know yet.”
City spokesman Paul Sitkoff said a demographer is making some edits on the maps selected by the City Council at the December meeting, and officials didn’t want to comment on how the districts might shake out until those come back for consideration in February.
City officials have not responded to Shenkman’s letter, Sitkoff said.
The submission period for residents to turn in more proposals also remains open, he said.
To residents concerned about the process, Murphy said “just say stay involved.”
“It’s very premature to start analyzing things until we get everything in front of us,” he said.
The final deadline for residents to submit maps for consideration is Jan. 28. Another public hearing will take place Feb. 8, and the City Council is expected to choose the final districts in March.
