2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California

[SevenEleven]

There you go. That's not a bad district. Now the hard part is making it work with the rest of the map.

That one and two Hispanic 50+ CVAP districts further south. And build from there.

[lfromnj]

Well you would agree then with that Stockton seat you have to push the rest of San Joaquin and Stanislaus into Sacramento county because there are aren't any roads left to the bay area.


So in exchange for Josh Harder becoming completely fortified, Mckerney takes a moderate hit assuming he runs in the red district but is still in a Clinton +8.5 district, on the other hand Ami Bera either has to go against Mckerney in a double bunk or run in the pink Trump +2 district that is trending left but still a Trump district. Mcclintock is still in a Trump +11 district although La malfa is now in danger in a wave in a Trump +13 district that includes Humboldt county(and when there is a 2 party race you can't vote green) So he might have lost in 2018 with this district.

The brown and blue districts in Fresno are 50% CVAP hispanic. There we go.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Ergh. This is such an obvious starting point for Far Northern California:



The counties work together so well and the 101 corridor is so distinct from the 5 corridor. I strongly encourage you start with this, block out your Sac Districts, and do the two Emerald Coast/Sonoma/Marin districts. Those shouldn't change much no matter what you do with the rest of the map, and they're just so logical.

[SevenEleven]

Why are you mapping with the partisan data turned on? California is not allowed to consider political affiliation or incumbency by law.

There's nothing wrong with pushing San Joaquin district into Sacramento. You're going to pull West Sacramento from Yolo anyway, so it's not a perfect two districts. I'm not a fan of that Sacramento split you did. It looks partisan and probably is if you're using the data to map.

I'd follow Blairite's advice. You can always put Davis in to Sacramento instead of cutting into Placer.

[lfromnj]

Why are you mapping with the partisan data turned on? California is not allowed to consider political affiliation or incumbency by law.

There's nothing wrong with pushing San Joaquin district into Sacramento. You're going to pull West Sacramento from Yolo anyway, so it's not a perfect two districts.

Then if you push 200k into Sacramento county where do you take the main suburban Sacramento district? Also just habit, as I switched from demographical data. I didn't look at the districts actual data really until after I made the district.

[SevenEleven]

Why are you mapping with the partisan data turned on? California is not allowed to consider political affiliation or incumbency by law.

There's nothing wrong with pushing San Joaquin district into Sacramento. You're going to pull West Sacramento from Yolo anyway, so it's not a perfect two districts.

Then if you push 200k into Sacramento county where do you take the main suburban sacramento district?

Davis and West Sacramento.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

There's nothing wrong with pushing San Joaquin district into Sacramento. You're going to pull West Sacramento from Yolo anyway, so it's not a perfect two districts. I'm not a fan of that Sacramento split you did. It looks partisan and probably is if you're using the data to map.

Yep. That said, another good trick is to pull Tracy from San Joaquin and pair it with the Tri-Valley.

Why are you mapping with the partisan data turned on? California is not allowed to consider political affiliation or incumbency by law.

There's nothing wrong with pushing San Joaquin district into Sacramento. You're going to pull West Sacramento from Yolo anyway, so it's not a perfect two districts.

Then if you push 200k into Sacramento county where do you take the main suburban Sacramento district?

You can do something like this:


I don't particularly like it, but basically you have City of Sac district, the Eastern suburbs district, and then you can put the balance with Solano or San Joaquin. The other good option is to draw Sac+West Sac, put the rest of the county into another district, and pull precincts out of that into the Tahoe district until the population is fine. You end up needing to play around with the southern border of the Tahoe district but that way you have no Sac/San Joaquin cuts.

[SevenEleven]

Tracy can certainly go with the Tri-Valley, but doesn't have to.

And while that district 5 might appear ugly to the naked eye, I don't see any harm in creating a "delta" district. It makes sense.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Tracy can certainly go with the Tri-Valley, but doesn't have to.

And while that district 5 might appear ugly to the naked eye, I don't see any harm in creating a "delta" district. It makes sense.

That's true, but dealing with both Vacaville and Fairfield gets awkward. I am happy, though, that this allows me to keep all of Stockton intact.

[SevenEleven]

Tracy can certainly go with the Tri-Valley, but doesn't have to.

And while that district 5 might appear ugly to the naked eye, I don't see any harm in creating a "delta" district. It makes sense.

That's true, but dealing with both Vacaville and Fairfield gets awkward. I am happy, though, that this allows me to keep all of Stockton intact.

Yeah splitting them sucks but there's going to have to be splits we don't like and this area is as good as any.

Del Norte-Humboldt-Mendocino-Sonoma is a perfect four county district with COI relevance but we break that up to avoid San Francisco.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Tracy can certainly go with the Tri-Valley, but doesn't have to.

And while that district 5 might appear ugly to the naked eye, I don't see any harm in creating a "delta" district. It makes sense.

That's true, but dealing with both Vacaville and Fairfield gets awkward. I am happy, though, that this allows me to keep all of Stockton intact.

Yeah splitting them sucks but there's going to have to be splits we don't like and this area is as good as any.

Del Norte-Humboldt-Mendocino-Sonoma is a perfect four three county district with COI relevance but we break that up to avoid San Francisco.

Not that your original post was wrong, but Marin-Sonoma is as perfect as it gets.

[Idaho Conservative]

Tracy can certainly go with the Tri-Valley, but doesn't have to.

And while that district 5 might appear ugly to the naked eye, I don't see any harm in creating a "delta" district. It makes sense.

That's true, but dealing with both Vacaville and Fairfield gets awkward. I am happy, though, that this allows me to keep all of Stockton intact.

Yeah splitting them sucks but there's going to have to be splits we don't like and this area is as good as any.

Del Norte-Humboldt-Mendocino-Sonoma is a perfect four three county district with COI relevance but we break that up to avoid San Francisco.

Not that your original post was wrong, but Marin-Sonoma is as perfect as it gets.

then have the Humboldt district go into Napa, like it used to. 

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Tracy can certainly go with the Tri-Valley, but doesn't have to.

And while that district 5 might appear ugly to the naked eye, I don't see any harm in creating a "delta" district. It makes sense.

That's true, but dealing with both Vacaville and Fairfield gets awkward. I am happy, though, that this allows me to keep all of Stockton intact.

Yeah splitting them sucks but there's going to have to be splits we don't like and this area is as good as any.

Del Norte-Humboldt-Mendocino-Sonoma is a perfect four three county district with COI relevance but we break that up to avoid San Francisco.

Not that your original post was wrong, but Marin-Sonoma is as perfect as it gets.

then have the Humboldt district go into Napa, like it used to.  

Of course. That's the logical option. I always start Northern CA with this:

[SevenEleven]

I think I've just about got things where I want them.





What's bothering me most right now is district 18. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to fix it/notice any other glaring flaws?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

That's a really solid map, except 18 seriously needs to drop the precincts in Santa Clara. You could probably rotate pop through 3, 11, 15, and 17 although I don't know if that'll screw up your municipal lines. The other thing I'd do is throw the Camp Pendleton precincts in CA-49, just for coastal contiguity. I personally disagree with some other pairings but they all seem justifiable. I'd be curious to see a LA area zoom.

[SevenEleven]

Yeah, I'll have to find a workaround there. Hopefully without cutting Fremont.



Main changes are a small cut in El Monte in exchange for keeping Pasadena whole and ceding it and Altadena to CA-27. This has the unfortunate effect of bringing CA-28 into LA, but not too different from how the current map has it. The SFV is cleaned up a lot better here. The West LA district takes in the wealthy black areas instead of trying to make two AA districts. Of course, its about the same AA% as the current CA-37 and Karen Bass could easily win here. If I'm the NAACP, I'd take this in exchange for shoring up the other AA district, as Maxine Waters won't be around much longer.

Which pairings are you not particularly fond of?

[Oryxslayer]

I'm going to try and steal that CA08 whenever I get back to working on my Map and Norcal, it's a version that rationally helps in both Bernardino and the valley. The combination of the northern 4 orientation by 🌐 and your CA08 wouldn't adjust the bay multi-county grouping and would help with the quad Empire HVAP seats.

The only major faults that I can find (plenty of minute ones but pages of discussion don't need to be wasted on those) are the cuts in OC and the already mentioned CA18. I have to imagine at least one of the major cuts of Irvine and Fullerton can probably be avoided if you cycle pop around, especially if all three of Anaheim, Orange, and Santa Ana are cut already. And CA18 shouldn't have major components in 3 counties, only two at maximum. A minor component like just say San Ramon from CC would be fine. I think the best way to avoid a Fremont cut might be a clockwise rotation.

[cvparty]

Which pairings are you not particularly fond of?

pacific palisades with ventura isn't really right, if you do a clockwise rotation with 29 taking in tujunga that would be a lot better
45 is kind of eh, san clemente is pretty far from anaheim hills
OC asians without fountain valley is :((

[SevenEleven]

The Riverside County districts are perfect IMO. I would encourage any mapper to try and fit a similar configuration. The cut of Ontario is unfortunate but ultimately it does make everything else fit better. That SB bottleneck really sucks.

I'm going to move Camp Pendleton to 49 as Blairites suggested. This might just allow me to keep Escondido fully within 43. Interestingly, doing this probably takes 43 from Safe R to Likely R. I think the conservative posters here are really misunderstanding just how bad the geography in CA is for the GOP these days. Losing Orange County is a wound they will never recover from.

I'm not a fan of having to split Paso and Atascadero from SLO, but I'm not sure what else to do. The other option would be splitting Ventura in half, but that's going to have a ripple effect in LA while being undesirable on its own merits.

I think one thing that might actually help with the problematic CA-18 is bringing back the Monterey County cut, and putting some of Hispanic San Jose in the Latino coastal district. Then I could probably push CA-17 fully into Santa Clara, avoiding a Fremont cut but risking the majority Asian district (not sure having an Asian majority district is that helpful given the diversity of the Asian community and lack of Bloc voting). Giving Tracy to the Tri Valley district could allow me to push both 3 and 9 further west and clean up the map, but then you still have three different counties there. thoughts?

[SevenEleven]

Which pairings are you not particularly fond of?

pacific palisades with ventura isn't really right, if you do a clockwise rotation with 29 taking in tujunga that would be a lot better
45 is kind of eh, san clemente is pretty far from anaheim hills
OC asians without fountain valley is (

Would you prefer an OC that keeps the coast in a single district?

[cvparty]

Which pairings are you not particularly fond of?

pacific palisades with ventura isn't really right, if you do a clockwise rotation with 29 taking in tujunga that would be a lot better
45 is kind of eh, san clemente is pretty far from anaheim hills
OC asians without fountain valley is (

Would you prefer an OC that keeps the coast in a single district?

IG that’d be better, would be pretty long though

[Oryxslayer]

I like this grouping, so I tried it out - and I ended up what a red district that was 69K underpopulated. I assume Glenn belongs with it, since that makes things work out for the other districts. However, that 69K is still a problem. So in essence, this map commits to a imperfect Solano cut (the perfect one would be a cut along borders between Vallejo, Benicia and the northeast of the county, but this overpopulates the north), yes?

In fact this map shows nicely how I ended up with my present NorCal alignment, since I was confronted with this pop discrepancy and then decided it was best to solve the problem using Sac, which is overpopulated thanks to the West Sac addition to begin with. So I rotated pop from this CA01 to CA04 using Siskiyou, Trinity, and rural Colusia, and then had CA01 eat from this CA02. But now CA04 is sprawling, and it made more sense to restore the coastal seat of CA03 rather than keep the Napa-Humbolt arrangement.  

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

I like this grouping, so I tried it out - and I ended up what a red district that was 69K underpopulated. I assume Glenn belongs with it, since that makes things work out for the other districts. However, that 69K is still a problem. So in essence, this map commits to a imperfect Solano cut (the perfect one would be a cut along borders between Vallejo, Benicia and the northeast of the county, but this overpopulates the north), yes?

Exactly. I intentionally left red underpopulated because at this point you have two choices: carve up Vallejo, Fairfield, or Vacaville; or take most of Sutter County (splitting Yuba City), and pushing blue and green south into Sacramento. They're both worth experimenting with and each have their drawbacks, but ultimately I think this has to be the starting point, given Marin/Sonoma, the Emerald Coast, Tahoe/Sac Exurbs, and the Northern Sacramento Valley are such obvious COIs.

[Greedo punched first]

My new Central Valley map. CA-19 and CA-20 are 53% HCVAP.

[SevenEleven]

What is that CA-20 supposed to accomplish? Yikes.