Aug. 27—A resolution opposing California’s special election to vote on new congressional district boundaries was rejected on Tuesday.
San Joaquin County Supervisor Steve Ding asked his fellow colleagues to support his resolution, which argues that the Nov. 4 special election will cost taxpayers more than $250 million while California faces cuts to health care, education, housing and other services.
Ding said as a board, supervisors are elected to guard the county’s checkbook and keep the public safe, not to get involved in partisan politics.
He said the voters gave the the 14-member Citizens Redistricting Commission the responsibility of drawing Congressional districts in 2010, and moving forward with a special election was irresponsible, given the state has a $12 billion deficit.
“A vote for this resolution is saying you respect the community who was at the table and who drew the lines,” Ding said. “This is saying you respect the voters more than you do the government officials in Sacramento who said ‘we really don’t care what the voters had to say, we know what’s right.’ We’re tired of being told by Sacramento that they know better.”
But during public comment, resident Betty Floyd said the special election gives people the opportunity to “fight back” against the actions of President Donald Trump, who pushed for the redrawing of congressional boundaries in Texas to favor Republicans.
“It is unprecedented for a president to demand a state to give him five votes, or any number of votes,” she said. “These are unusual times and we have to fight back. The overwhelming majority of citizens in the state of California agree with Gov. Newsom, and I ask (supervisors) to change your attitude, and change your stance.”
Both the California Assembly and Senate passed bills last Thursday to send the matter to the polls, where voters will decide whether or not to approve new districts that aim to give Democrats five more seats in Congress.
If approved. the new boundaries would split San Joaquin County into five districts.
The new 9th District would include the cities of Manteca, Tracy, Pittsburg, Antioch and Oakley, and a portion of north Stockton north of Mormon Slough and west of Wilson Way.
A chunk of north and central Lodi bordered by Kettleman Lane in the south, Cherokee Lane in the east and Lower Sacramento Road in the west would be in a new 7th District, along with Galt, Elk Grove, Wilton, Sloughouse, Clements, Linden, Farmington and West Sacramento.
The remainder of Lodi would be in a new District 8 with Isleton, Rio Vista, Dixon, Vacaville, Fairfield, Vallejo, Richmond and Hercules.
The southeastern portion of the county would be included the the 5th District with Calaveras, Amador , Alpine, Mono, Inyo, Tuolumne, Mariposa, and eastern Madera and Fresno counties.
“You gentlemen really know the most important thing you can do for our community is let our community have a voice,” Stockton resident MaryAnn Cox said. “And that voice is a voting voice. All this resolution through the state is, is an opportunity for us to voice our opinions. And if you choose not to do that, you are not representing the community at large.”
Bobby Bivens, president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s Stockton branch, said he was disappointed supervisors did not support a resolution calling out Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and his desire to keep minorities from being represented.
Bivens told Ding his proposed resolution was partisan politics even though the supervisors denied that it was.
“It is very political when people in America are having their right to vote taken away by a (president) of a nation that has proven he cares nothing about people of color,” Bivens said. “He has attacked every city with a Black mayor, Black governorship. He does not care and he leads our country.”
Bishop Dwight Williams of New Genesis Outreach Ministries said he supported Ding’s resolution, agreeing with the supervisor that the county’s diverse population of white, Black, Latino and Asian residents, Democrats and Republicans, spent months developing the current boundary maps four years ago.
“A consensus was formed, and we don’t need to change that midstream,” he said. “What Texas is doing is Texas’ business. Frankly, gerrymandering is wrong — and let’s be real — both parties are guilty of doing it. San Joaquin County does not need to throw itself into this type of situation, which is going to be, in many ways, a race to the bottom.”
Resident Cynthia Cuevas said Proposition 50, the Use of Legislative Congressional Redistricting Map Amendment that made November’s special election possible, was not about racism, but taking away what California voted for in a past election.
“This proposition is for one reason alone: to tilt elections in a particular direction,” she said. “I just don’t believe it’s to the state’s benefit. It’s going to take away citizens’ voice and give politicians free rein to redistrict yet again and again.”
Supervisor Robert Rickman said the redistricting effort is a reversal of what the voters wanted more than a decade ago, adding that when he was vice chair of the county’s committee in 2020 and 2021, input was collected from Republicans, Democrats and those affiliated with other parties through online surveys and public workshops.
“We hear a lot today, that the citizens have to have a voice,” he said. “When these (new) maps were drawn, where were the citizens’ voice then? We don’t know who influenced these maps or what politicians or elected officials were involved with these maps. There hasn’t been any draft proposals.”
In Texas, redistricting was passed without direct voter input, and the state has historically redrawn its districts without a citizens committee like California, and without voters going to the polls.
Ding’s resolution was ultimately rejected by a 2-3 vote, with board chair Paul Canepa, vice chair Sonny Dhaliwal and supervisor Mario Gardea dissenting.
“We are a country divided, and you can see it by this topic here,” Canepa said. “I believe in the voters, and this is something I won’t be supporting, because for me, it sends a message to people that it’s a divided question and divided issue and how do we dot it? At the end of the day, people need to get out and vote, and vote what their preference is.”
San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters Olivia Hale confirmed Tuesday afternoon that the special election would cost about $4.25 million.
She added that while the announcement of a special election on such short notice can be stressful, she said it will be executed.
“Administering a statewide election under such tight deadlines can be difficult, however, we are election administrators and our job is to implement the law,” she said. “The Legislature of California made a decision therefore, we will successfully administer the Nov. 4 election.”