Hard-left activist groups' redistricting plans pilloried by citizen input

Neighborhood residents have uncovered and harshly criticized the divisive and dangerous nature of a racially-based redistricting plan for San Jose that has been concocted by a collection of militant partisans--some of whom don't even live in SJ.  The scheme (with the charming Orwellian name of "Unity Plan") breaks up established communities of interest in the pursuit of heavy-handed, race-based gerrymandering. A collection of resident emails to the city follows.

On the radical zealotry of the redistricting effort:

Special interest groups, including non-profits, have paid staff who lobby the city council year-round for political objectives. Thus, these interest groups should be viewed through this lens when they propose maps, especially maps with a marketing slogan.
**

With all due respect, you’all should disregard any input on redistricting from outside groups or special interests such as Asian Law Alliance, La Raza Round Table Latino Leadership, NAACP, Silicon Valley Rising, South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council, or any other special interest group, especially those that have members that live outside of the city of San Jose. These groups should have zero input on this re-districting exercise to the commission.

**
The “unity” map should be thrown out of contention, clearly it's biased and submitted by outside special interest groups. You’all should solicit more input from individual residents who actually live in our city and our neighborhoods for redistricting and disregard outside groups or factions.

This is not a political exercise, redistricting is a way to combine like minded residents that live in adjacent neighborhoods with city services, resources, representation and schools that will serve their community needs.

Do not split up neighborhoods. This is about our own city residents and their needs, not outsiders or those hell bent on disruption of our city.
Redistricting is not about someone who doesn't live in San Jose or a special interest group who will be served by the politics of redistricting for their special group or political party. Disruption does not equal redistricting and because we like our city and we want it to be better doesn’t mean we’re asleep. Check your conscience before you make the final decisions.

The so-called “Unity Map” that’s been proposed by the Labor Union & some non-profits, which is the basis for the Commission’s proposed C4 Map, has the appearance of some type of gerrymandering. It does not look like it follows the legal requirements for functional congruity, compactness and preserving existing districts as much as possible.

District 3 barely squeaks through at 101 by the Flea Market. It is logically congruent, but not functionally congruent. And the requirement for compactness is not being met. The same carving in and out can be seen where District 2 weaves in and out around D9. One of the goals stated with the “Unity Map” is to create “an eastern Downtown District with a Hispanic plurality”. Imagine if one of the map drawers said they wanted to create a “White plurality”! And, what was the reason for carving out the areas around D2?

On breaking up Willow Glen:
I have lived in Willow Glen for almost 20 years and have seen the deterioration of the community and our neighborhood. From the increase in crime, to the increase in homeless to the deteriorating level of the schools. I believe that the current plans for redistricting San Jose, which include the splitting up of Willow Glen, is an outrageous example of political gerrymandering intended to reduce the voice of tax paying single family home owners.

**
Willow Glen is one of Santa Clara County’s oldest neighborhoods which until 1936 was its own incorporated town. AB849 encourages district map be drawn that create geographical compactness and states district boundaries should be easy to identify, understandable by residents, and utilize natural or artificial landmarks. The boundaries of Willow Glen are a perfect example of this and therefore should remain intact as a community.

**

On breaking up Naglee Park:
I was dismayed to see that the plans submitted by staff would put the Campus Community (Naglee Park) in a Council District that is disconnected from the University itself. I live Downtown. Naglee Park is totally linked to the University and Downtown and the resulting issues of living in the central city—we have students who live here, board and care homes, sororities and fraternities. We have far more homelessness and other issues that are linked to being adjacent to Downtown. Over the years Naglee Park has dealt with a variety of issues related to its location— student parking, traffic, homelessness, Greek parties, board and care issues, and in past years prostitution. With our Council representative and working closely with the University we have been able to address those issues though so many still remain.

Also, any plan that divides Naglee Park/the Campus Community should be a nonstarter. This is a strong neighborhood that has a sense of place (largely because we have worked together on those issues) and should remain in one Council District

**

On breaking up Vendome:

The Unity map does not honor the Commission's guidelines. It does not respect natural and rational geographic boundaries. Relocating the Vendome to District 6 ignores the fact that we are divided by the river, railroad tracks, Highway 87 and the airport. Also the Vendome has no communality of interests with District 6.

District 6 does not share the challenges that face the residents in the downtown neighborhoods. District 6 doesn't share our proximity to the homeless encampments and is not affected by the route that unhoused people take from the river to the N. Fourth Street Salvation Army kitchens or the programs in St. James Park. District 6 does not have the density of social services, transitional housing and permanent supportive housing that impact downtown.

The Vendome is socio-economically and ethnically diverse. We have single family homes, apartment houses, condo complexes, and duplexes. People choose to live here for its diversity, the availability of public transportation, and the proximity to the downtown core. Our neighborhood is not even mentioned on the Unity map. I'm offended that people who have never set foot in our neighborhood would presume to determine its political future.

In that regard, the Unity map was constructed without consultation with community organizations and leaders. The Vendome has an active neighborhood association. The VNA's leadership was elected by our residents in a well organized and fair election. The president of the VNA, is accessible, openminded and active in the community and the city as a whole. He can be reached. It was clear from the Unity map presentation on Thursday that nobody tried.

While the goals of the Unity map are admirable, the people who have promoted it have neither done their homework nor their outreach work, and they have produced a map that may well cause more disunity than anything else.

**

I have lived in district 3 my entire life. I have worked hard and continue to volunteer in my community, parks, rivers and wellness centers. My community as I know it would be completely destroyed if the Unity map is used. This would be devastating to me and everyone I know. We have all worked to hard to bring neighbors together. This would take the wind out of my sail for sure. I feel like this is a scary movie. This is the kind of thing that gives someone nightmares. My husband and I are now both active in our communities and a change this drastic would put an end to all we have done for these communities. We live in the Vendome and the Unity map would put us with the Rosegarden! That does not make any sense at all. Take a look at what's between us and the Rosegarden. That just would destroy us. Please consider the C3 or Community map as these would not completely shred the fibers of our community.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity.

Photo taken by davecito.