2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Orange and San Diego.

Are your 28th, 29th, and 30th on that map VRA compliant?

I don't know about 28th or 29th, but 30th is. Does 28 or 29 need to be? My 39 (Ontario) and 41 (San Bernardino) are VRA compliant. 28 still likely elects a Hispanic candidate. If it isn't a VRA seat, it likely still doesn't dilute any votes. It's 50% Hispanic CVAP. My 29th is Pasadena.

That's fine. What's the Asian percentage in 29?

CA-29 is 34% Asian.

Thought that might be a problem. It should be possible to hit 40% Asian CVAP in that district if it's reconfigured.

[Greedo punched first]

Orange and San Diego.

Are your 28th, 29th, and 30th on that map VRA compliant?

I don't know about 28th or 29th, but 30th is. Does 28 or 29 need to be? My 39 (Ontario) and 41 (San Bernardino) are VRA compliant. 28 still likely elects a Hispanic candidate. If it isn't a VRA seat, it likely still doesn't dilute any votes. It's 50% Hispanic CVAP. My 29th is Pasadena.

That's fine. What's the Asian percentage in 29?

CA-29 is 34% Asian.

Thought that might be a problem. It should be possible to hit 40% Asian CVAP in that district if it's reconfigured.

Yes, but it isn't a VRA seat. I thought 34% was fine. I thought my CA-29 was more of a jack of all trades seat that could elect any Democrat.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Orange and San Diego.

Are your 28th, 29th, and 30th on that map VRA compliant?

I don't know about 28th or 29th, but 30th is. Does 28 or 29 need to be? My 39 (Ontario) and 41 (San Bernardino) are VRA compliant. 28 still likely elects a Hispanic candidate. If it isn't a VRA seat, it likely still doesn't dilute any votes. It's 50% Hispanic CVAP. My 29th is Pasadena.

That's fine. What's the Asian percentage in 29?

CA-29 is 34% Asian.

Thought that might be a problem. It should be possible to hit 40% Asian CVAP in that district if it's reconfigured.

Yes, but it isn't a VRA seat. I thought 34% was fine. I thought my CA-29 was more of a jack of all trades seat that could elect any Democrat.

The commission won't go for that. The SGV Chinese population is easily one of the most recognizable ethnic blocs in Southern California and it needs it's own seat even if you can't get to 50% CVAP.

[SevenEleven]

Anything less than 40% Asian shouldn't be considered.

[Greedo punched first]

Is 40% Asian even possible? I looked for more areas, but couldn't find them. Is that in CVAP, or just total population?

[SevenEleven]

Is 40% Asian even possible? I looked for more areas, but couldn't find them. Is that in CVAP, or just total population?

Mine is 42.9% total pop, 40.7% CVAP. My comment was referring to total population.

[Oryxslayer]

Is 40% Asian even possible? I looked for more areas, but couldn't find them. Is that in CVAP, or just total population?

Mine is 42.9% total pop, 40.7% CVAP. My comment was referring to total population.

Yeah it's not hard even if you have to make compromises with the other seats to get over 40% by Pop, which is probably enough to control who ends up as the top dem. The base is a diagonal rectangle which is cornered by Monterey Park, San Marino, Sierra Madre, and Monrovia - the rest is can be played with. Unless you really go out of your way to include the White suburbs to the east or the Hispanic cities to the south you should be fine hitting 40%.

[Greedo punched first]

Is 40% Asian even possible? I looked for more areas, but couldn't find them. Is that in CVAP, or just total population?

Mine is 42.9% total pop, 40.7% CVAP. My comment was referring to total population.

I just got it to 40.8% total. Is that fine? This is so difficult to draw.

[SevenEleven]

Is 40% Asian even possible? I looked for more areas, but couldn't find them. Is that in CVAP, or just total population?

Mine is 42.9% total pop, 40.7% CVAP. My comment was referring to total population.

I just got it to 40.8% total. Is that fine? This is so difficult to draw.

It should be fine.



Mine utilizes all the West SGV cities and takes the Asian parts of Montebello and Pasadena east of the junction.

[Greedo punched first]

A 40% Asian seat was a pain to draw, but I got it.

[Oryxslayer]

Okay, quick poll/question. Which of these four Chino Hills seats/OC orientations works out best?

Map 1:



Map 2:



Map 3:



Map4:




So I'll provide a bit of explanation behind the variations. It all begins with La Habra. I have always considered La Habra somewhere between the gateway cities and the suburban tracts of Orange County. Demographically it's majority Hispanic when no other OC suburbs in the area come close to that distinction. The cities major arteries are all going east-(north)west into LA, which has led to the county partnering with LA for some of their essential services like Firefighting rather than OC. I even gave the city it's own cultural group back on that OC cultural groups map from a year ago to reflect this situation.

This ironically leads to the maps that carve out La Habra and partner the city with it's brothers in the Gateways leads to the Chino Hills seat being plurality Asian. However, these maps have other problems. Map 1 has the odd bite shape and leads to the Huntington/Belt seat taking in a bit of LA for seemingly no reason (but there is one). On the other hand Map 3 has the weird connections going on around Cerritos, even though the former problems were fixed. Map 2 and Map 4 put La Habra in the seat and lose the Asian plurality, but they do clean up county cuts...even though those don't really matter in this part of California.

[SevenEleven]

Where is map 4? That sounds like it would be my pick. I understand but really don't like the Garden Grove split. Map 3 finding a way to include Buena Park would be nice.

[Oryxslayer]

Where is map 4? That sounds like it would be my pick.

I thought is would be self-explanatory after seeing the other three maps...but I guess that is what happens when you make an assumption. Post has been updated. Maps 3 and 4 also have the option of playing around with Stanton and the unincorporated West Anaheim region to not have the Garden grove cut, but leads to a less compact seat. 

[Greedo punched first]

I'm working on a new map. No OC-Riverside. It's actually easier to split Riverside and San Bernardino.

[SevenEleven]

Out of those configurations, I think Map 4 does make the most sense. I'm not a fan of the Huntington Beach district moving inland, but it is what it is. I'm assuming you have an OC-SD connection here.

[Oryxslayer]

Out of those configurations, I think Map 4 does make the most sense. I'm not a fan of the Huntington Beach district moving inland, but it is what it is. I'm assuming you have an OC-SD connection here.

Yeah OC-SD is a thing. It's the flaw in the map, and when I post soon I will be looking for potential alternatives.

[Greedo punched first]

Finally did away with OC-Riverside by drawing out Calvert.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Map 4 probably is the best by COI but I prefer map 3, just because the lines make a lot more sense at the neighborhood and arterial level. Like sure, La Habra might make the most sense with thr gateway cities but at the end of the day you're squiggling all over the place becaise of a pretty small population which won't change your larger ethic group blockings. Any map that doesn't slpit Anaheim Hills from Anaheim is a bad map so 1 and 2 are out. One thing: I would encourage you to take in more of Industry and West Covina and drop Hacienda Heights if possible.

[Oryxslayer]

Map 4 probably is the best by COI but I prefer map 3, just because the lines make a lot more sense at the neighborhood and arterial level. Like sure, La Habra might make the most sense with thr gateway cities but at the end of the day you're squiggling all over the place becaise of a pretty small population which won't change your larger ethic group blockings. Any map that doesn't slpit Anaheim Hills from Anaheim is a bad map so 1 and 2 are out. One thing: I would encourage you to take in more of Industry and West Covina and drop Hacienda Heights if possible.

Why would you drop Hacienda. Honest Question here. IF you are building an Asian access seat in the region, then HH has to be in there. It's literally got the largest Buddhist Temple in the US. Since you guys seem in favor of La Habra going in with the seat then that also covers all road arteries.

As far as West Covina goes, that would require splitting La Habra Heights from La Habra itself, or cutting Lakewood.

Also, here's a pro-tip to everyone who Maps CA using DRA: the Industry Block groups are lying to you. Only 1K people live in Industry. The Block groups that build the city are all built out of a street or two from other communities which then take in a bit of Industry. This is one of the many reasons why I always convert my maps into GIS form, since you can clearer see the lines that I was going for. It is also why I always allocate pop so that if I take in a micro-region not included in the DRA map, I also have a micro-region that will be dropped so as to balance everything. For example, I take in the arm of Industry, but I drop that growth outside of Hacienda, among other swaps made.

[Greedo punched first]

Which is worse: OC-Corona or Glendora-Santa Clarita?

[Oryxslayer]

Which is worse: OC-Corona or Glendora-Santa Clarita?

Glendora-Santa Clarita and it isn't even close.

[SevenEleven]

Realistically, we have to be aware that all of these maps are lying to us in the sense that the 2020 population data and CVAP is going to be much different than the 2018 estimates we are relying on here.

Hispanics especially were underestimated in the 2008-2009 estimates prior to the 2010 Census. Major cities tended to be overestimated while areas such as the Central Valley and Inland Empire were underestimated, although methods may have improved since then. I suspect a 1-2% increase in Hispanic CVAP in most districts will be seen in the 2020 data. It shouldn't change the general configuration of most districts but can be meaningful when looking at specific city lines or splits and when building a minority composition.

I also second keeping Hacienda Heights with Diamond Bar, etc. though I like including Whittier there as well.

[Greedo punched first]

Realistically, we have to be aware that all of these maps are lying to us in the sense that the 2020 population data and CVAP is going to be much different than the 2018 estimates we are relying on here.

Hispanics especially were underestimated in the 2008-2009 estimates prior to the 2010 Census. Major cities tended to be overestimated while areas such as the Central Valley and Inland Empire were underestimated, although methods may have improved since then. I suspect a 1-2% increase in Hispanic CVAP in most districts will be seen in the 2020 data. It shouldn't change the general configuration of most districts but can be meaningful when looking at specific city lines or splits and when building a minority composition.

I also second keeping Hacienda Heights with Diamond Bar, etc. though I like including Whittier there as well.

I prefer this: Pomona-Glendora-West Covina-Covina-Hacienda Heights. This produces a solid Hispanic seat.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Map 4 probably is the best by COI but I prefer map 3, just because the lines make a lot more sense at the neighborhood and arterial level. Like sure, La Habra might make the most sense with the gateway cities but at the end of the day you're squiggling all over the place because of a pretty small population which won't change your larger ethic group blockings. Any map that doesn't split Anaheim Hills from Anaheim is a bad map so 1 and 2 are out. One thing: I would encourage you to take in more of Industry and West Covina and drop Hacienda Heights if possible.

Why would you drop Hacienda. Honest Question here. IF you are building an Asian access seat in the region, then HH has to be in there. It's literally got the largest Buddhist Temple in the US. Since you guys seem in favor of La Habra going in with the seat then that also covers all road arteries.

As far as West Covina goes, that would require splitting La Habra Heights from La Habra itself, or cutting Lakewood.

Also, here's a pro-tip to everyone who Maps CA using DRA: the Industry Block groups are lying to you. Only 1K people live in Industry. The Block groups that build the city are all built out of a street or two from other communities which then take in a bit of Industry. This is one of the many reasons why I always convert my maps into GIS form, since you can clearer see the lines that I was going for. It is also why I always allocate pop so that if I take in a micro-region not included in the DRA map, I also have a micro-region that will be dropped so as to balance everything. For example, I take in the arm of Industry, but I drop that growth outside of Hacienda, among other swaps made.

I thought Hacienda had a higher Latino population than it does and that it should be lumped in with the Latino VRA district to its north. However, I've come to realize that it's very easy to draw a map without a San Diego-Orange split which forces you to drop Hacienda regardless:



Alternatively, you can flip CA-36 around and put Diamond Bar and Walnut up in CA-37. Regardless, i would split city lines before putting that weird arm of Industry in CA-36. It's population is immaterial and it ruins district compactness.

[Greedo punched first]

I have Walnut in CA-28.