This doesn't really matter, but the names given to districts in the document are very strange. The Santa Clara district is at least in Santa Clara County, although it doesn't contain Santa Clara proper, but the district labeled Cupertino is not the district with Cupertino in it. On that note, it's funny to see the way the Asian district takes a bite out of the western Santa Clara County district by taking in Cupertino. It looks ugly, it doesn't serve an actual community of interest ("Asian" isn't a community of interest), and ultimately that district still ends up only 48% Asian by VAP.
The weird inclusion of Cupertino with other areas due to the Asian presence makes 0 sense with a clear lack of connection between them and the rest of the district except maybe southern Sunnyvale, and I believe this was a criticism of last decade’s map which the commission clearly ignores. I live pretty close to the area and it’s a lot more interconnected with West SJ/Saratoga population wise than Fremont. Would make much more sense for it to be a part of the Silicon Valley district to the West, and that district should also take out San Carlos and include Los Gatos instead, switching this with the weird SF-Peninsula-Santa Cruz district.
The East Bay districts imo should also connect all areas in the outer East Bay and maybe the hill parts of Berkeley/Oakland as opposed to dividing up Tri Valley and Danville/Lamorinda. Clearly the commissioners have 0 clue what they’re doing and are deferring to last year’s map- reminds me somewhat of Mass Dems keeping that ugly reach into Fall River in Kennedy’s old district which makes no sense now that Frank is gone. The Senate map is somehow even more horrendous than this one though and the commission has a lot of work to do.
