Bay Districts at Risk in Remap for State Senate : Politics: Population in the area has failed to keep pace with statewide growth. Consequently, some boundaries could be combined or shifted eastward.

The South Bay’s state Senate districts are expected to be among the losers in this decade’s version of the California reapportionment numbers game.

The political arithmetic goes like this: Based on 1990 Census data, each of the state’s 40 Senate districts must contain 744,000 people. To reach that magic number, the three Senate districts that encompass the South Bay need to add thousands of new constituents because population in the area has failed to keep pace with statewide growth patterns.

Consequently, the boundaries for these seats could be combined or shifted eastward. That could cost one or more of the incumbents to lose their jobs. And it could trigger a ripple effect that ultimately boosts representation in fast-growing, Republican-leaning areas in the Antelope and San Gabriel valleys and Riverside and San Bernardino counties.

“People are moving to the Inland Empire, Lancaster and Palmdale,” said Sen. Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles). “They are moving out of the urban core.”

Watson and fellow Democrat Ralph Dills of Gardena and Republican Robert Beverly of Manhattan Beach represent virtually all of the South Bay.

Although politicians can artfully design boundaries to ensure safe seats for many incumbents, even those facing population deficits in their districts, one fact in the reapportionment puzzle is inescapable: Growth in Southern California’s inland areas is dramatically outstripping growth in the coastal plain.

And that probably means redistricting problems for at least a few lawmakers in districts that are significantly below the 744,000 population figure. As Sen. Bill Leonard (R-Big Bear) notes, “Political power sooner or later does follow the population.” His district includes booming inland areas in the San Gabriel Valley and San Bernardino County.

Statewide, the ultimate result of the redistricting process could be a cut in the Democratic majority in the Senate, where the current lineup is 26 Democrats, 11 Republicans and one independent, with two vacancies.

Los Angeles County, currently represented by all or part of 17 Senate districts--could lose the equivalent of one full seat, according to lawmakers and legislative staffers. And although the exact shape of the districts will not be decided for months, in the South Bay the result probably will be diminished Senate representation.

Historically, as population grew in Los Angeles during most of this century, reapportionment turf fights revolved around skirmishes between Northern and Southern California. Now, given the population shifts within Southern California, part of the battle may end up pitting the interests of such established coastal communities as Torrance and Redondo Beach against the fast-growing inland areas.

“With the population static on most of the coast and ballooning inland . . . that will definitely tip the scales of power to the inland counties,” said Assemblyman Pat Nolan (R-Glendale), a member of the Assembly Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee that is crafting a redistricting plan.

A look at census figures highlights why legislative boundaries are expected to be pulled toward the inland areas. For instance, the inland city of Pomona jumped a whopping 42% in the 1980s, to 131,723. By comparison, Torrance’s population grew just 2%, to 133,107, and Redondo Beach’s population increased by 5%, to 60,167. The city of Los Angeles grew 17% between 1980 and 1990, but the state as a whole grew by 26%.

By failing to keep pace with statewide growth, Los Angeles, Torrance, Redondo Beach and most of the rest of the South Bay stand to lose representation in the Legislature, according to lawmakers and others beginning to draw the new lines.

Based on the census numbers, the Senate Elections Committee has estimated that Watson’s 28th Senate District is 57,700 below the 744,000 population figure that the new boundaries need. And the South Bay’s other two senators find their districts below that figure by the following amounts: Beverly, in the 29th District, 92,000; Dills, in the 30th District, 62,600.

Comparable population projections for the Assembly and the House of Representatives have not been made public.

Once the Legislature approves a reapportionment plan, it goes to Gov. Pete Wilson for his signature. No matter what Wilson decides, it is widely expected that the final maps will face court challenges, especially from Latino or Asian groups seeking increased minority representation.

Reviewing the preliminary numbers for the Senate districts, some lawmakers have already cooked up their own formulas to compensate for population deficits they face. For instance, Watson said she would like to take El Segundo from Beverly and swap Hancock Park and the Larchmont area in Los Angeles with Sen. Herschel Rosenthal (D-Los Angeles) for Culver City and parts of Mar Vista and Venice.

Watson, who is black, may be in a good position to make such deals because changes in the federal Voting Rights Act require political map makers to take steps to ensure that minority representation is not shortchanged.

Under the act, Watson said, the districts of minority lawmakers “have to be somewhat protected.”

Beverly agreed, saying that reapportionment “is a new game this year” because the act compels the Legislature to carve out as many minority districts as possible.

Beverly added that he has no preferences concerning the shape of his new district. Whatever it looks like, he said, “my present intention is to run for reelection.”

Other state senators, however, are flirting with running for Congress as they contemplate the changes reapportionment might bring.

Dills, 81, has said that if his district is dramatically redrawn, he might instead launch a congressional campaign. But he stressed that he would not run against an incumbent congressman.

Rosenthal also acknowledged that he could develop a case of Potomac Fever if his Senate district is carved up. He said he may enter the race for the seat held by Rep. Mel Levine (D-Los Angeles) if the congressman decides to run for the U.S. Senate. Levine’s district stretches into El Segundo, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach and part of Torrance.

“I could conceive of the possibility of running for Congress,” Rosenthal said. “I’m not looking at it seriously, but the possibility does exist.”

The prospect of senators jumping into congressional races is being taken seriously for several reasons. First, term limits for state lawmakers imposed by the passage last year of Proposition 140 have prompted some legislators to contemplate new political opportunities.

Second, in contrast to a decade ago, state legislators plan to exercise more control over the drawing of congressional lines than they did after the 1980 Census, according to Nolan.

“Ten years ago they were willing to accept” a plan drawn up by the late Democratic Rep. Phillip Burton of San Francisco, Nolan said. But this time, he predicted, they will listen to their congressional colleagues and “then go ahead and draw whatever they want.”

SOUTH BAY’S STATE SENATE DISTRICTS

Here are the current boundaries for most of Los Angeles County’s state Senate districts. Those covering all or part of the South Bay are in white.

Based on 1990 Census figures, new state Senate districts must be redrawn to each represent 744,000 people. The following chart, based on preliminary legislative estimates, shows how current Senate districts encompassing all or part of the South Bay compare to that number.

District Represented by Number below 744,000 population 28 Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles) 57,700 29 Robert Beverly (R-Manhattan Beach) 92,000 30 Ralph Dills (D-Gardena) 62,600