Between the Lines: Hidden Partisans Try to Influence California's Independent Redistricting

In August, Christopher Rodriguez phoned into an online meeting of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, the 14 volunteers who will draw new congressional and legislative maps that will be used for the next decade.

Rodriguez argued that no matter how the commission determines the state’s 52 congressional districts, Camp Pendleton, the sprawling Marine Corps base in north San Diego County, should be grouped together with the nearby cities of Fallbrook and Oceanside to keep “our military population together."

If necessary, he argued, the commission should jettison cities farther down the coast, including Del Mar and Encinitas, which are “just completely foreign to us here in North County. They don’t come up here, we don’t go down there.”

Rodriguez introduced himself as a “small business owner,” a “Marine Corps combat veteran,” and “a father of seven.”

He neglected to mention that he’s also an Oceanside city council member — and a Republican running for Congress in 2022 whose prospects could be buoyed by a district that is anchored around the Marine base and his hometown and that excludes the Democratic areas to the south. The current 49th District, represented by Democrat Mike Levin, is 36% Democratic and 33% Republican by voter registration, but the San Diego County portion is about 38% Democratic.

Rodriguez said that his motivation was to advocate for the shared interests of the military communities, and that he was “absolutely” not factoring in his campaign prospects. “Running for office, and being a public servant as a city council member, is completely irrelevant,” he said.

A tight timeline

Since March, the commission has been hearing public testimony on which “communities of interest” to unite in legislative or congressional districts — and which to partition into political irrelevance. It requires arbitrating the competing demands of myriad ethnic, economic and political interests across the nation’s most diverse state.

The full commission meets Tuesday and Wednesday in Sacramento. It has until Dec. 27 to submit the final congressional and legislative maps to the secretary of state, the state Supreme Court ruled on Sept. 22. The panel had asked for an extension until Jan. 14, due to the delays in getting the required data from the U.S. Census. But the court-ordered schedule keeps the June 2022 primary on track, as does a scheduling bill signed Monday by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The stakes are especially high in the northern San Joaquin Valley, the northern Los Angeles suburbs and Orange and north San Diego counties — the sites of California’s most hotly contested congressional races.

Though the commission is prohibited from considering the electoral interests of elected officials, candidates or political parties, there’s nothing that bars any of those players from trying to influence the decisions, nor any laws or rules requiring public commenters to list potential conflicts of interest.

But not disclosing a personal stake may cross an ethical line, said Jessica Levinson, a former member of the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission and now a Loyola Law School professor.

“It’s good to hear from the parties about how the lines would benefit and harm them, but we kind of want to know who is speaking to us,” she said. “Knowing who the messenger is allows us to evaluate the message.”

Sara Sadhwani, chair of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, said that while more disclosure could be helpful, rules set by voters in the ballot measure that created the panel don’t require speakers to detail any partisan affiliations.

“We very much take our commitment to the process seriously, to ensure whoever wants to call in can,” she told CalMatters. “And we recognize that some of those might be candidates or people representing those candidates, even if they don’t acknowledge their connection. At the end of the day, the key piece for us is ensuring all Californians have a chance to weigh in.”

Sadhwani said the commission does receive input that appears coordinated — all basically repeating the same point — but said she and other commissioners don’t give those arguments any more weight than those from lone callers.

“We’re keeping our eyes open for some of those smaller voices that might otherwise get drowned out by these louder, coordinated efforts,” she said.

Hiding true identities?

There have already been numerous examples of citizens failing to mention their  partisan affiliations while making recommendations to the redistricting commission couched in nonpartisan language.

On Sept. 18, Ada Briceño, who called herself a “labor organizer” from Stanton, urged the commission to put the “very different communities” of north and south coastal Orange County into different districts.

“North Orange County, where I live, is the home to immigrants from around the world,” she said. “South Orange County reflects more of the wealthy, large beachfront homes that most people see on TV.”

Only especially politically plugged-in listeners — or those with the spare time to play detective — would know that Briceño is chair of the Orange County Democratic Party.

Asked why she didn’t disclose that, Briceño said her party role isn’t relevant. What is relevant, she said, is her 25 years as a leader with Unite Here 11 and as an organizer in Anaheim’s redistricting in 2015 and 2016, as the city transitioned from at-large to district elections.

“I feel like those are hats that I hold that are really ingrained and very cemented,” she said. “I just felt that it was critical that if I have a little bit of time to speak, I feel that it is crucial to highlight those issues.”

Also in the Sept. 18 hearing, two callers who only gave their first names took the opposite position from Briceño.

Commission chair Sadhwani, a Los Angeles County Democrat who is an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College, said some of the safeguards in the process include that all conversations about redistricting must be open to the public, and that all comments are available in a public database. She also said the commission will post each proposal weekly so the public can see the maps.

Despite the potential pitfalls, public participation is a key selling point for the commission.

“It’s a thousand times better than a dude like me going in to meet with the state’s top elected leaders smoking cigars and drawing lines,” said Paul Mitchell, vice president of Political Data, which provides voter tracking services to both Democratic and Republican campaigns.

“The most important thing is for the commission to have a clear set of standards and values,” he added. “If you have good footing as to what you want to achieve in the redistricting process and what kind of values you have, it’s hard for someone to trick you into drawing bad maps.”