Proposed district map undergoes changes
Schwab sees political move as ‘unfair to that neighborhood’
CHICO >> There’s been another round of confusing changes to the proposed district map for Chico, but the good news is it doesn’t actually change anything.
The city released a new map Thursday morning that caught many — even some city councilors — by surprise, when it appeared that District 1 and District 3 had swapped names. This would be the second number swap, after the council changed the former District 1 with District 4.
One other large change to the map was the inclusion of a census block that previously belonged to District 6 that had been split in half and included with the new District 1.
City demographer Michael Wagaman said the two districts were renamed to lessen the zigzag pattern of numbering that was in place. The California Voting Rights Act does not require, but suggests that districts be numbered from north to south. Now, with the second name changes, Chico’s districts seem
to go in a sort of counterclockwise pattern and then loop back. Wagaman said the changes make “no substantive effect.”
Legal concerns from locals
Chico First leader Rob Berry issued a letter Thursday to Assistant City Attorney Andrew Jared and the city of Chico, calling into question the legality of voting on sequencing and the council’s decision to renumber districts without first seeking public comment.
“To make such a decision without affording the public an opportunity to be informed about the options and latitude of the council on district sequencing, to spring it on the council minority and public at the moment of decision, after public hearings have closed is, at the very least, a violation of the spirit and intent of the law,” Berry wrote.
Jared was unavailable for comment but did email a statement that said: “The issue will be addressed in the staff report on the forthcoming ordinance.” That staff report is likely to be released several days ahead of the next council meeting on Feb. 4.
Reaching across the aisle
At the council meeting Tuesday, Councilor Karl Ory made the motion to sequence the elections in districts then known as 3, 4, 5 and 7, as they contain the highest population of non-white residents. In the same motion, he proposed renaming District 4 to District 1, so that the districts that will be voting in the 2020 election are all odd numbers, as suggested by the California Voting Rights Act.
It was that move that effectively locked out Councilor Sean Morgan from running again in his district until 2024.
Councilor Scott Huber seconded Ory’s motion, and the council voted to approve, 4-3, with councilors Morgan, Kasey Reynolds and Ann Schwab against.
Though she usually throws her vote in with the liberal majority on council, Schwab said she couldn’t vote for a system that locked out voters for another two years.
“This districting is tearing our community apart,” Schwab said. “Not having a council member in one district for two years, whether they were elected in that district or not, just seems unfair to that neighborhood.”
Schwab said she would have given her vote to a motion that had allowed a vote in every district with a term-expiring councilor in it — that would have been Morgan, Stone, Ory and Schwab’s districts. Since Ory and Schwab share a district (now called District 1), that left ample room to include District 7, which has the highest concentration of minority residents.
“I don’t often share the same ideology as council member Morgan, but he was elected and has supporters,” she said. “He ought to be able to run in 2020, in the district he lives in now. That community should have someone to represent them.”