Redrawing of district boundaries will shake up California politics

Vicious new political battles. Farewells from longtime power brokers. More candidate choices for minority communities. Possibly even a more moderate statehouse. All could spring from the latest reshaping of California’s electoral landscape — done for the first time by voters rather than Sacramento insiders.

The initial test of the new process will be Friday, when an independent panel that now performs the once-a-decade redrawing of political lines will release draft district maps for the state’s 53 members of Congress, 40 state senators and 80 Assembly members. Incumbents could find themselves in unfriendly territory as seats merge and party leanings flip.

Californians stripped the Legislature of the redistricting task amid frustration with a polarized state government and gerrymandering that made seats perennially safe for most incumbents. The maps will be further refined, but it is already clear that the panel’s work will dramatically affect the state’s Legislature and congressional delegation.

Interactive: Has your district been redrawn?

“What this will create, in the short term, is chaos,” as officeholders and aspirants scramble to find a place in the new order, said Paul Mitchell, a Democratic redistricting expert, who foresees an intense 2012 election campaign. When the dust settles, he predicted, half of the state Assembly will be freshmen and at least 10 current members of Congress will not return.

When Sacramento lawmakers drew the maps, they protected their own ranks wherever possible, leading to contorted and deformed districts that produced little competition or turnover. One of those, known as the “ribbon of shame,” is a congressional district that stretches in a reed-thin line along the California coast for 200 miles from Oxnard to the Monterey County line. Currently represented by Democrat Lois Capps of Santa Barbara, it is derided nationally as an example of blatant gerrymandering.

Voters put an end to that at the ballot box in 2008 and 2010 by creating the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. The measures they passed called on the 14-member panel to draw contiguous districts of equal proportion ensuring that minorities, when their numbers dictate, have an opportunity together to elect politicians of their choice. In addition to congressional and legislative lines, the panel determines districts for the State Board of Equalization.

The commissioners — five Democrats, five Republicans and four unaffiliated — must ensure that minorities are not disenfranchised and should aim to respect community boundaries and produce districts with a “fairly regular shape.” They are forbidden to consider how any boundary would affect an incumbent or a political party.

The release of 2010 census figures in March, showing a population shift from the coast to inland areas and a notable growth of Latinos and Asians, kicked off a five-month sprint to draw the maps. Since then, commissioners have held public meetings up and down the state, hearing from residents, elected officials and interest groups.

Their efforts have not been without controversy: The commission has been buffeted by allegations of partisanship, notably over the technical firm selected to draw the maps. Republicans contended that it had Democratic ties. The commission imposed safeguards against partisan interference. But both parties have tried to influence the commission’s work by weighing in on the process.

Once the maps are released Friday, the tension will undoubtedly heighten as the commission launches a second round of public hearings. Earlier meetings were so crowded, and some exchanges so testy, that the panel plans to have armed security at future gatherings.

For officeholders, strategists and others whose livelihood is politics, “this is very high stakes,” said Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at USC and a former GOP political operative. “For most normal people, ‘redistricting’ is the most boring word in the English language. But for members of Congress and state legislators, it’s a cause for full-out panic…. This is musical chairs with switchblades.”

The suspense has been palpable in Sacramento, said Democratic consultant Steve Maviglio.

“The Legislature has been meeting for the better part of a year not knowing where they are going to run [for reelection] or who is going to run against them,” he said. “For politicians, who crave survival, it’s a very scary place to be.”

The commission has offered hints of its intentions in recent days, releasing conceptual maps to drive discussion. Some of those have suggested that Democrats would have an opportunity to pick up one or two seats in each house of the Legislature. Two per house would obliterate the need for Republican votes to raise taxes or take any other action requiring a two-thirds majority in the Democrat-dominated Capitol.

At the same time, an increase in competitive districts, where winning would require candidates to have broad appeal, could put more centrists in the statehouse. Although the details are fluid and final maps are two months away, analysts are predicting at least four newly competitive districts in the state Senate, 11 in the Assembly and six in Congress.

Other shifts are likely. In Southern California, veteran Reps. David Dreier (R-San Dimas) and Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar) will probably face daunting reelection campaigns because of demographic changes in their districts. The three seats held by Democratic African American congresswomen in South Los Angeles and nearby suburbs may be whittled to two, placing Rep. Laura Richardson of Long Beach in a faceoff with Rep. Linda Sanchez of Lakewood in an increasingly Latino district centered in Long Beach.

Democratic Reps. Howard Berman of Valley Village and Brad Sherman of Sherman Oaks could end up in the same San Fernando Valley district, possibly leading to a costly intra-party battle unless Berman decides to run in what is expected to be a new district nearby with a large Latino population. Such a move could place him in conflict with a Latino candidate.

Some remain concerned about the commission’s work.

Tony Quinn, a Republican redistricting expert who has been among the commission’s sharpest critics, said the maps to date are flawed because they fail to unite some communities that belong together. Ventura County could be split, for example, with Thousand Oaks attached to Los Angeles County communities.

The panel appears to be producing “some weird, crazy seats,” he said, asserting that the commission should hire an independent group, unaffiliated with any political party, to review the work before the Aug. 15 deadline for ratifying the maps.

Others are impressed with the group’s efforts.

“If these early maps are an accurate predictor of what the final lines will look like,” said Schnur, “then the commission has done a phenomenal job of adhering to voters’ wishes.”

Interactive: Has your district been redrawn?

seema.mehta@latimes.com