A bill authored by Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria would create an independent redistricting commission for Merced County – but the Board of Supervisors opposes it, saying it’s an unnecessary, unfunded state mandate.

Assembly Bill 1441 would create an independent, 11-member commission that would choose the maps for county supervisor districts beginning after the 2030 census. The bill is making its way through the legislative process. It easily passed in the Assembly and is being heard in the Senate.

In an interview with The Merced FOCUS, Soria, D-Merced, pointed out that much of her legislative package this year is focused on her district. That includes AB 1441, which was born from conversations with community members, she said.

“This bill is really about enhancing our democratic process and ensuring that there’s a fair representation of all residents in the redistricting process,” Soria said in an April Assembly hearing for the bill.

The U.S. Constitution mandates a census every decade to tally the country’s population changes. States then use the new census numbers to redraw electoral districts for representatives in Congress, the state Legislature, and the state board of equalization.

Local governments, including counties and cities, must also go through a redistricting process to ensure each elected representative represents roughly the same amount of people.

Under existing California law, the Merced County Board of Supervisors chooses district maps.

“This bill is really about enhancing our democratic process and ensuring that there’s a fair representation of all residents in the redistricting process.”

Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria, D-Merced

In central California, Fresno, Kern and San Luis Obispo counties will all operate with independent redistricting commissions after the 2030 census, thanks to legislation similar to AB 1441.

The proposed bill for Merced County would require the political party preferences of the commissioners to be as proportional as possible to the political makeup of the county’s registered voters. It also would require at least one commissioner to live in each of the existing supervisorial districts. The bill lists a number of eligibility requirements for commissioners and outlines the process for how they will be chosen.

The Board of Supervisors approved its current district maps on Dec. 7, 2021 by a 4-1 vote, with former Supervisor Rodrigo Espinosa casting the lone no vote.

Currently, each of Merced’s five supervisorial districts represents between 54,000 and 58,000 residents – of which anywhere from 25,000-36,000 are of voting age.

Recent data from the Merced County Registrar of Voters shows that of the county’s roughly 135,000 registered voters, nearly 40% are registered Democrats; 30% Republican; 22% are no party preference; and 4% are American Independent.

While Merced County’s redistricting process in 2020 met the requirements of the Voters Rights Act, it’s arguable whether all of the district boundaries make sense functionally.

Take the county’s massive District 1, for instance, which stretches across the middle of the county and includes communities in very different corners of Merced. It includes the city of Livingston and the southern parts of the city of Merced.

It also stretches westward to include the unincorporated community of Santa Nella, which shares a close relationship with the city of Gustine in District 4, and is considered part of the county’s westside, which has been represented by District 5, historically.

District 1 also includes the unincorporated communities of Le Grand and Planada, on the opposite side of the county.

After the 2020 redistricting process, several California counties, including Stanislaus, San Luis Obispo and Riverside, were hit by lawsuits alleging gerrymandering and discrimination.

Already, Soria has made amendments to the bill in an effort to compromise with its opponents. For example, she reduced the number of commissioners from 14 to 11 members. The Board of Supervisors also preferred the commission be advisory, but Soria said doing that would make the commission weaker than what the community hoped for.

Opposition to the Bill

Despite Soria’s amendments, Merced County Board of Supervisors opposes her bill, contending it “seeks to usurp control from local government, while imposing a new level of bureaucracy at a significant cost to taxpayers.”

Board Chair Josh Pedrozo traveled to Sacramento to testify against the bill during the Assembly hearings. In an interview with The Merced FOCUS, Pedrozo said one of his biggest concerns with the bill is that it’s unfunded, calling it an “unfunded state mandate.”

A legislative analysis predicts the cost of creating the commission could be in the hundreds of thousands every 10 years. However, those costs could be eligible for state reimbursement.

Pedrozo pointed out that unlike other counties, Merced County didn’t get sued over its redistricting process after the 2020 census because the county conducted a robust public process. This bill may curtail that process, he said.

He worried the county may face challenges soliciting enough qualified applicants for the commission as well. During his testimony in an Assembly committee hearing, he said the commissioners might be “unfamiliar with governmental processes or redistricting and will likely undermine, directly or indirectly, a fair, equitable, and transparent democratic process, something that Merced County takes very seriously.”

Additionally, the bill caught the board by surprise, Pedrozo said.

“That’s one of the things that frustrated us the most,” he said. “A little bit of a heads up would have been nice because …this is not something that is going to ingrain (Soria) with the people of Merced County.”

Soria addressed a number of Pedrozo’s concerns in an interview with The FOCUS, reiterating the bill is backed by community groups.

Responding to Criticisms

Regarding the cost, Soria said if the bill is passed in the current legislative session, there’s enough time before the next redistricting process to seek funding to cover the costs.

Soria’s local, Republican colleagues in the Assembly also opposed the bill. Assemblymembers Juan Alanis, R-Modesto, Health Flora, R-Ripon, Alexandra Macedo, R-Tulare and David Tangipa, R-Fresno, all voted against it.

Tangipa, who previously worked for a Fresno County supervisor, in an Assembly hearing called AB 1441 “targeted legislation” to force Republican counties to “fall in line.”

“I think a lot of (what) this bill does is … it tells those who were duly elected, and the natural process and how redistricting has (been) done before with the local electeds who spend a majority of their time there, that you no longer get to be part of that voice,” Tangipa said.

“A little bit of a heads up would have been nice because …this is not something that is going to ingrain (Soria) with the people of Merced County.”

Josh Pedrozo, chair of the Merced County Board of Supervisors

Soria argued she also was elected to represent voters in her Assembly district, which covers over 90% of Merced County.

“We heard from the stakeholders too, today, – residents that came up from Merced that are saying they want this,” Soria said. “And with all due respect, I also was elected by the majority of the voters of the three counties in this district. And they sent me to Sacramento to ensure that their voices are represented.”

Soria also questioned why it wouldn’t be fair for an independent commission to choose local maps, when that’s how maps are chosen for state representatives.

Additional opposition came from the Rural Counties Representatives of California, which penned two letters opposing the bill.

Who Supports It?

The bill is cosponsored by Communities for a New California’s Action Fund, an organization that was involved in the city of Merced’s redistricting process in 2020.

After the 2020 census, the city of Merced convened an advisory redistricting committee. Ultimately, the Merced City Council still chose the maps, narrowly approving them on a 4-3 split vote.

Supporters of AB 1441 say they want residents to have the same opportunity to be involved in the redistricting process at the county level.

“This bill is about local control,” said Anna Lisa Vargas, an organizer with Communities for a New California. “It puts power back in the hands of the voters of Merced County. Voters should choose their elected officials. Elected officials should not choose their voters.

“We can’t afford not to invest in public trust,” she said. “The current process may follow the letter of the law, but that’s not enough. AB 1441 ensures we meet the spirit of fair representation, especially for communities that have been historically left out. So we believe this is forward thinking, especially, and also community-centered reform. And it’s Merced’s turn.”

Other supporters include a number of labor groups, Central Valley Pride, Jakara Movement and the League of Women Voters of Merced County.

Susan Walsh, the president of the League in Merced County, said the League believes having an independent redistricting commission will boost voter engagement at a “really critical level of government.”

Walsh said she disagreed with the supervisors’ argument that it would be hard to solicit a good number of qualified applicants, pointing to the city’s commission after 2020. The League hoped to nab a spot on the commission, but ultimately did not due to the high volume applicants.

“I think that they will find a lot of people, a lot of well-informed, concerned citizens who want to participate. This is a great opportunity to see democracy work,” she said.

Walsh took it a step further and said she hopes independent redistricting commissions become the standard in all California counties, even if it’s a state mandate.

Soria’s local Democratic colleagues, Assemblymembers Joaquin Arambula, D-Fresno, and Jasmeet Bains, D-Bakersfield, both voted in favor of the bill. So did Assemblymember Catherine Stefani, D-San Francisco, who noted in one Assembly hearing that she’s from Merced.

AB 1441 is waiting for a second review in the state Senate prior to a vote there. If it passes the Senate, it will head to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk for the governor to decide whether to sign it into state law.

About the Author

Brianna is the accountability and government watchdog reporter for the Central Valley Journalism Collaborative.