Sonoma County supervisors to discuss latest map adjustments in contested redistricting process

Just weeks away from finalizing the new boundaries of Sonoma County’s supervisorial five districts, the Board of Supervisors is facing fierce criticism over competing proposals and conflicting demands from constituents.

The drawing of these boundaries, triggered by the nation’s once-a-decade census, will shape elections and government decisions for the next 10 years. The changes can strengthen or weaken the political sway of neighborhoods and interest groups and empower or disempower communities that make up the county’s population of 500,000 residents.

The board on Monday will meet for a public workshop to discuss boundary adjustments to the disputed map recommended by the board’s 19-member Advisory Redistricting Commission. The workshop is one of two final meetings supervisors have to close out the monthslong process and vote on a final map by the state’s Dec. 15 deadline.

The final proposal is expected to be posted on Nov. 30 and the board may adopt it on Dec. 7. Any additions or changes would push back formal adoption to Dec. 14.

The board majority appears poised to move forward with the commission’s recommended map, signaling its support in a closely watched Nov. 16 meeting.

Still, at least three of the supervisors have been clear that they want to see additional changes to that map, which may serve as a basis for a final proposal.

Supervisor Susan Gorin, who represents the 1st District, including Sonoma Valley, northeastern Santa Rosa and its outskirts, has proposed what she called “minor modifications” that would reunite Bennett Valley, which is split in the commission’s map. She has also proposed other adjustments around the Santa Rosa boundaries separating her district and Chris Coursey’s 3rd District, which covers much of central Santa Rosa.

The commission’s map moves the hot-button county complex on Chanate Road in Santa Rosa out of the 3rd District and into the 1st. Gorin, however, is interested in seeing Chanate stay in Coursey’s district, citing his work with neighbors and Santa Rosa officials on the troubled site

“He has worked really hard and effectively around Chanate,” Gorin said. “I think it’s appropriate that it remain in his district.”

The offer could be seen as the political equivalent of a holiday fruitcake — a present few would want but that can’t be easily rejected.

Coursey didn’t balk at the offer, however, and said he is open to any changes that do not counter the commission’s equity principles. He has said he would support the commission’s map as is.

“The equity principals that they put forward, they spent a lot of time on that,” Coursey said.

Supervisor David Rabbitt, whose 2nd District takes in part of Rohnert Park, all of Cotati and Petaluma and the dairy belt of southwestern Sonoma County, said he is not a fan of the commission’s recommendation to move all of the city of Rohnert Park into the 5th District, represented by Supervisor Lynda Hopkins.

West county residents say the change would hand overwhelming political power to Rohnert Park, making it the new political center of what has been the county’s most rural district, with all of just one city, Sebastopol.

Rohnert Park officials were similarly outraged at the recommendation and argued the city has nothing in common with west county. City representatives, who have been among the most vocal in board feedback, have said they would rather be wholly in the 3rd District or stick with the current map that splits the city in two.

“It’s been a whirlwind,” Hopkins said.

Another key issue is what to do about the long underrepresented part of southwestern Santa Rosa, including Roseland and Moorland. The largely Latino neighborhoods are currently in Hopkins’ 5th District.

But they should be in the 3rd District with the rest of central Santa Rosa, residents told the county commission, citing their wider set of shared interests with city neighbors.

Hopkins has said she supports Roseland and Moorland moving into the 3rd District but is also trying to balance what she is hearing from west county and Rohnert Park.

“I am reading what feels like hundreds of emails from constituents and non-constituents,” Hopkins said.

Changes to the borders around Forestville and Sebastopol are high on Hopkins’ list, as is adding more population to the 5th District. Under the commission’s map, it has the lowest population at 92,812, compared to the other districts which have population counts ranging from 97,772 to 99,959.

Like Hopkins, Rabbitt would like to see adjustments made to the boundaries dividing their districts around Sebastopol and Hessel.

“That’s not really as clean and clear as it could be,“ Rabbitt said.

With final hour approaching, Rabbitt said he is curious to see where his colleagues stand. On Nov. 16 Coursey, Gorin and Supervisor James Gore appeared to lean toward accepting the commission’s map, while Hopkins and Rabbitt said they were interested in discussing other maps.

If that split remains following Monday’s workshop “it’s all moot unless someone changes their mind,” Rabbitt said.

“It’s right on the edge of one way or the other,” he added.

Gore did not respond this past week to requests for comment.

Both Rabbit and Gorin said they think the board will be able to reach a decision by their Dec. 7 target, while Coursey observed there is “not much wiggle room” for the board to miss it.

“Hope springs eternal,” Gorin said. “I hope that the boundary changes recommended by all of us slip by easily.”

You can reach Staff Writer Emma Murphy at 707-521-5228 or emma.murphy@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @MurphReports.