Redistricting Comm'n Votes 13-0 To Approve THIS Final Election District Map That Will Impact LB Elections For Next Ten Years. City Atty Says New Council Districts Take Effect Immediateoy Subject To A 30 Day Legal Challenge Period
If LBREPORT.com didn't tell you, who would?
No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report.
LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.
(Nov. 19, 2021, follows breaking and several updates) -- LB's Districting Commission voted 13-0 at its Nov. 18 meeting to approve the final election district map below which the City Attorney's office says will take effect immediately but is subject to a 30 day legal challenge period.
The non-elected LB Commissioners refused to consider changes proposed by coalition of Latino groups that submitted an attorney-signed letter alleging the map would violate the federal Voting Rights Act.
LBREPORT.com has learned that former CD5 Councilwoman Schipske (an attorney) says her current work precludes her from filing suit challenging reconfigured CD5.
In pertinent parts, the new election district map:
Chops CD 5 longtime ELB district and attaches it to Cal Hts/part of Bixby Knolls. CD 5 incumbent Mungo says she's considering moving to Cal Hts (where she says she owns a home) to seek reelection in 2022. Previously declared CD5 candidates Schipske and Dobson are out of the 2022 CD5 election cycle unless they move their residences into the newly drawn CD5. Other CD 5 candidates may surface in newly configured district.
Stretches CD 4 (Supernaw) northward taking El Dorado Park and nearby neighborhoods
Unites Wrigley and Los Cerritos but splits part of Bixby Knolls
Gives downtown interests two Council votes (CD 1 for western Port, CD 2 for entertainment district + QM) but puts CD1 incumbent Zendejas in same district as incumbent CD2 Allen. If Allen runs in CD1 in 2022 cycle, she would face Zendejas and challenger Lee Charley, likely a high money race that would proceed to a runoff between top two initial finishers.
Splits Bluff Park angering neighborhoods along CD 2/CD 3.
The Commission is legally prohibited from considering the residences of any elected official or other individual in drawing district lines.
[Scroll down for further.]
Under the LB voter approved 2018 City Charter Redistricting amendment (ostensibly to minimize or prevent political influence in drawing district lines), the Commission is legally required to respect communities of interest and geographically contiguous areas. Some have questioned whether stretching CD 5 to connect physically separated areas west of the Airport violates that principle.
The sole legal remedy specified in the City Charter amendment to challenge the ultimately adopted map is a court challenge (petition for writ of mandate) BUT state law may also affect challenges.
Sponsor
A City Attorney memo to the Mayor and Councilmembers, dated November 18, anticipated the Redistricting Commission action approving the map in stating:
In anticipation of the adoption of new City Council district boundaries by the Independent Redistricting Commission (“Commission”), please find attached a memo from outside counsel addressing some of the issues resulting from the new boundaries.
Some highlights of the memo include:
New Council district boundaries take effect immediately, per City Charter section 2502(b), but are subject to a thirty-day legal challenge period.
The new boundaries, if adopted timely, will be in effect for future representational and electoral purposes, including for the provision of constituent services.
Current City Council members will represent the same-numbered district as they
did before but the districts they represent will now be the newly-drawn districts...
For Council members who no longer reside in the districts they represent, the City Attorney's office cited the memo from outside Counsel Olson Remcho which opines that "state law prohibits a new redistricting plan from shortening an incumbent’s term. Therefore, even if a Council member no longer resides in the newly-drawn district they represent, the member will continue to represent that district until their term ends, at which point a candidate who resides in and has been elected from the new district will take office."
[Outside counsel memo] [The Redistricting Commission action]...is subject to referendum and therefore cannot take effect for thirty (30) days. See Cal. Const., art. II, § 9 and 11; Ortiz v. Board of Supervisors, 107 Cal. App. 3d 866 (1980). Regardless, even if that is the case, the Commission-adopted plan will still take effect by December 18, 2021, assuming the Commission adopts the plan on November 18.
Once the Commission-adopted map is in effect, the old district boundaries are
rescinded and replaced with the new districts. The new district boundaries will therefore be in effect for future representational and electoral purposes, including for the provision of constituent services. The current City Council members will represent the same-numbered
district as they did before but the districts they represent will now be the newly-drawn Commission districts. This result is both consistent with the plain language of the Charter and the Elections Code. It is also consistent with how the City of Los Angeles interprets and applies its similarly-worded Charter provision, namely that effective immediately the current City Council members will represent the same-numbered district as they did before but the district boundaries will be the newly-drawn districts.
B. Incumbency
Under the two plans being considered by the Commission, we understand that two Council members may no longer reside in the districts they currently represent: one member is from an odd-numbered district and one is from an even-numbered district.
Under City law, the odd-numbered districts are up for election in 2022 while the even-numbered districts are up for election in 2024. Therefore, the member who lives in an odd-numbered district will serve out their term until January 2023, and unless they move to an
odd-numbered district and successfully win election in 2022, they will no longer hold office beginning in 2023.
The member who lives in the even-numbered district will remain in office through 2024 even though they no longer reside in the district. That is because state law prohibits an incumbent’s term from being shortened as the result of redistricting:
(a) The term of office of any council member who has been elected and whose term of office has not expired shall not be
affected by any change in the boundaries of the district from which the council member was elected.
(b) At the first election for council members in each city following adoption of the boundaries of council districts, excluding a special election to fill a vacancy or a recall election, a council member shall be elected for each district under the new district plan that has the same district number as a district whose incumbent’s term is due to expire. This subdivision does not apply when a city
transitions from at-large to district-based elections...
...(d) Except as provided in subdivision (a), a person is not eligible to hold office as a member of a city council unless that person meets the requirements of Section 201 of the Elections Code and Section 34882 of the Government Code Cal. Elec. Code § 21622
As a result, Council members who no longer reside in the districts they currently represent once
the new plan goes into effect will continue to serve until their term ends.
Finally, we understand that the Council member who represents an even numbered district will now reside in an odd-numbered district. That member could, if they chose, run for election in 2022 in the newly-created odd-numbered district in which they reside, provided that if they won election they would have to resign their current office before being sworn into the new office. But we are not aware of any state or local law that would prohibit that member from running for a different Council seat while they continue to hold
their current office.[FN below]
[Footnote: If the member wins election from the newly-drawn odd-numbered district in 2022, they would resign their current seat and the City would be required to hold a special election to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the term. See Long Beach City Charter, § 204.
Candidates for that office would be required to reside in the newly-drawn even-numbered district. See Cal. Elec. Code § 2166(e). If the member loses the election, they may continue to hold their current office until their successor qualifies for office after the 2024 elections.]
Sponsor
The Commission's two maps both eliminate CD 5 incumbent Stacy Mungo and previously declared challengers Gerrie Schipske and Michelle Dobson from the 2022 election cycle (unless they move their residences.) New CD 5 candidates are expected to surface in the coming weeks from within the newly drawn 5th district.
Councilwoman Mungo has signaled she's mulling moving to seek a third Council term. In her Nov. 13, "Neighborly News" newsletter, Mungo stated in part: "For those who know me well, you know my previous residence is still in Cal Heights...While I continue to enjoy serving and have grown from all you have taught me and requested of me, moving back would be a big decision. My family and I will need to decide what is best once we know the lines are final."
Former Councilwoman Schipske may be mulling a different response. Rather than move, she wrote in a November 14 Nextdoor.com comment that she may enter 2022 Mayor's race "to give the Eastside a voice to ensure ELB has a voice." She adds that she's been informed there may be residents who will take legal action challenging reconfigured CD5.
New CD 5 candidates are expected to surface in the coming weeks from within the newly drawn 5th district.
Sponsor
Sponsor
Both maps expand CD 4 (Supernaw) northward to take large parts of what had been CD 5 including El Dorado Park South neighborhoods. At the Nov. 10 Redistricting Commission meeting, Reform Coalition Exec. Dir. Ian Patton and former CD 8 Councilwoman Rae Gabelich supported the map above despite its decimating ELB portions of CD 5. Incumbent Supernaw doesn't face re-election until 2024.
Downtown hospitality and Port interests got what they wanted: two representatives for their interests with the two districts split at Pacific Ave. CD 1 (previously a working class area north of downtown disproportionately impacted by shootings) was expanded to include the western part of the Port. The move will effectively assist CD1 incumbent Mary Zendejas who will now have access to potential campaign contributions from Port-related interests as she seeks re-election in 2022. CD 2 was stretched to cover the eastern part of the port (including Queen Mary) and downtown entertainment areas.
The map prioritizes reuniting Wrigley, which was split in a bitter 2011 Council-engineered gerrymandering. A decade later, reuniting Wrigley strengthens the political base of CD 7 incumbent Roberto Uranga who faces re-election in 2022. (Reform-minded challenger Carlos Ovalle is among Uranga's early challengers.)
Support really independent news in Long Beach. No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report. LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. You can help keep really independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.
