Past Public Comments

Keep Costa Mesa United:
I support Maps 5 and 2A

Costa Mesa Homeowner

Chairman Do, Vice Chairman Chaffee and Supervisors,

I respectfully each of you to adopt Proposal 2 as discussed on November 2 for each and all, of the following reasons:

a. Proposal 5 violates the requirements, priorities and intent of the U.S. Constitution, Federal Voting Rights Act, California Constitution and Elections Code section 21,500 by unfairly diluting the vote of Asians to preclude their election of a representative of their choice.

b. Proposal 2 is the best in compliance with the requirements, priorities and intent of the U.S. Constitution, Federal Voting Rights Act, California Constitution, and Elections Code section 21,500.

c. Proposal 2 is the only map submitted with population numbers and percentages that deviate the least from the target population and is the only map that creates the best Majority Hispanic Minority Voting District and the best Influence Asian Voting District.

d. Proposal 2 is the fairest geographic representation of the three major diverse racial/ethnic populations and the current trending demographics in Orange County.

e. Proposal 2 creates the best and strongest Majority Minority Voting District. Proposal 2, District 1 has the highest population count Hispanics, more than the corresponding District 2 in Proposal 4 and District 5 in Proposal 5. Proposal 2 ties with Proposal 5 with the largest Hispanic percentage.

f. Proposal 2, District 4 has the best Influence Asian Voting District. Both the largest percentage and highest population count of contiguous Asians, significantly more than Proposals 4 and 5.

g. Proposal 5 has the weakest Influence Asian District (32.2%) which is sacrificed to create a 67.9% Majority Hispanic Minority district, the highest percentage tied with Proposal 4, and sacrificed to create the strongest Influence Hispanic Voting District at 45.5%. The Influence Asian District is adjacent to both of these Hispanic districts.

h. Failure to adopt Proposal 2 will have a substantial negative impact on the rights of Asians to fair representation as protected by the U. S. and California Constitutions, the Federal Voting Rights Act and the California Elections Code.

i. Adoption of Proposals 4 and 5 will adversely affect the Constitutional equal opportunity rights of an increasing Asian population to participate in the political process for the next ten years.

j. Adoption of Proposals 4 and 5 will deny a significant racial minority “from voting a representative of their choice” contrary to the protections afforded under the Constitutions and Laws of the United States and California.

k. Proposal 2 includes all of Santa Ana and Little Arabia and parts of Garden Grove in the Majority Minority Voting District as desired by the speakers on November 4 supporting Proposals 4 and 5.

Please vote for Proposal 2, as presented on November 2, 2021, the map that is the redistricting plan most and best “focused on equal representation and keeping communities of interest together”. Voting for Proposal 2 avoids the perception of self-interest since it strengthens the Hispanic Majority Minority Voting District, gives the right for fair representation to the Asians and similarly includes the cities in adjacent districts desired by proponents of the other maps.

Adoption of any map other than Proposal 2 denies the right of Asians to participate in the political process, gives the appearance of a conflict of interest, self-interest and political preferences and is Anti-Asian discrimination in violation of the federal and state Constitutions, Voting Rights Act and Elections code 21,500 et seq.

I also support any technical or other changes to Proposal 2 that do not decrease the percentages nor population numbers as reflected by Proposal 2 presented on November 2, 2021.

Additional data and analysis supporting Proposal 2 are included in attachments and exhibits. Attachment 1 is additional comments on Equal Population Districts. Exhibit 1 is Population Deviation Comparison Chart. Attachment 2 is additional comments on Hispanic and Asian Districts. Exhibit 2 is Hispanic and Asian District Comparison Chart. Exhibit 3 is Racial Comparison Chart.

Thank you for your consideration in this manner.

Exhibit 1
Attachment 1
Exhibit 2
Attachment 2
Exhibit 3

My name is Susan Tate and I live in Newport Coast. I feel strongly that Newport and Costa Mesa should not have their districts split.

I support Maps 5 and 2A.

Maps 5 and 2-A keeps Costa Mesa United. I endorse Map 2-A and 5.

My name is Audrey Prosser. I am a resident in what is currently District 2.

Dear Sirs:

I support keeping Costa Mesa UNITED. Why would that be done? Cities should remain together.

I think maps 5 and map 2A are best for Orange County and for Costa Mesa. Please do not arbitrarily divide Costa Mesa.

Thank you,
Bob Hartman

KEEP COSTA MESA UNITED

SUPPORT MAPS 5 and 2A.

Keep this fair snd balanced. Do not break up Costa Mesa.

Dear Orange County Board of Supervisors,

I live in District 2 and I hope that you will commit to keep cities in tact when developing the new supervisorial districts. With this in mind I support maps 2A and 5, keep Costa Mesa intact.

Thank you!

To Whom It May Concern,

I am a fourth generation Costa Mesa resident that goes back to the days of it being called “Goat Hill. I am appalled and dismayed there is a movement to split up Costa Mesa in the redistricting process.

It is ESSENTIAL that we keep Costa Mesa united and not divided.

I implore you to only consider Maps 5 and 2A!

“Keep Costa Mesa United” I support Maps 5 and 2A

Thank you for keeping redistricting fair and balanced respecting our civic representation in Costa Mesa.

Dear OC Supervisors,

I strongly support maps 5 and 2a. Having worked, shopped and dined in Costa Mesa for the last 30 years, I know that Costa Mesa culturally and socioeconomically distinct from surrounding communities.

Thank you for your attention.

Keep Costa Mesa United.

I support maps 5 and 2A.

Keep Costa Mesa United.

I support maps 5 and 2A.

I respectfully ask that you keep Costa Mesa united and not split it for redistricting.

I support Maps 5 and 2A.

Thank you for your serious consideration to my request.

Keep Costa Mesa United!

I support map 5 and 2A.

Dear Board of Supervisors,

I would appreciate that you, our Board of Supervisors, keep Costa Mesa together. Do not split our city. I suggest that the Board consider strongly maps numbered 5 and 2A.

It is important that you, as a Board, remain unpolitical in this process and that Costa Mesa continue to be United as a singular District. Anything else would suggest gerrymandering. We are watching this process carefully and your decisions will speak volumes.

Dear Board of Supervisors,

Please consider fairness and transparency when picking your new redistricting maps. Please keep Costa Mesa united. Cities should not be split. I support maps 2 and 5 A as they have the fairest boundaries. Do not lower yourself to political manipulations.

Sincerely,
Ann Owens
Lake Forest, Cac

--

Dear Board of Supervisors,
Please be fair in drawing the new redistricting maps. Costa Mesa or any other city should not be divided. One week is insufficient time to peruse all the maps presented, however I do prefer maps 2A and 5. These political tricks only show your lack of honesty and fair play.

Sincerely,
Ann Owens
Lake Forest, Ca

It is transparently political that you want to split the city of costa mesa. Keep Costa Mesa united! Keep gerrymandering out of politics.

If you want costa mesa voters, come up with better policies that appeal to them. Do not divide a city. I support maps 5 and 2A.

I am a resident and homeowner in Newport Beach, CA.

Hello...

I'm a Costa Mesa business owner and a Newport Beach resident.

Keep Costa Mesa United. I support Maps 5 and 2A.

I live in Costa Mesa, and the following maps are the BEST for Costa Mesa residents:

2A and 5

Splitting up Costa Mesa violates the 'keep communities together' which is mandated in law!

To the members of the commission which is considering redistricting Orange County and surrounding counties,

As residents of San Clemente for 33 years we emplore the Commission to keep Orange County beaches as they are with representation by Orange County, and not by San Diego nor Los Angeles. All Orange County beaches shall be united in one congressional district. We need representatives that truly represent our beach area and will address our unique concerns, not those of Los Angeles, San Diego or Riverside counties.

We appreciate your consideration to keep our district intact

Please do NOT redistrict Orange County. We need to keep all voting districts as it is and all beaches of Orange County part of the same county going forward. Orange County has a history with all of its beaches, keeping the caliber of those beaches above all other counties, in many ways. y

All Orange County Beach cities shall stay in Orange County and not be redistricted to other counties.y

Sincerely,
Fabia Barsic
Resident of San Clemente, Orange County

To the Members of the Commission which is considering redistricting Orange County and surroundings counties.

As a resident of La Palma I emplore the Commission to keep Orange County beaches as they are with representation by Orange County, and not by San Diego nor Los Angeles. All Orange County beaches shall be united in one congressional district.

PDF

Good afternoon,

Please find the attached agency comments from Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission relative to the 2021 County of Orange Redistricting Proposals. If you have any questions, please contact Carolyn Emery, Executive Officer, at (714) 640-5100 or email cemery@oclafco.org.

Luis Tapia
Policy Analyst
Orange LAFCO

My name is Zachary Griggy and I represent over 6,000 UC Irvine undergraduates in the UCI undergraduate student Senate. I’m writing on behalf of the Associated Students of UC Irvine to express our concerns about Proposals 2 and 4 and how they treat Irvine’s college student population and UC Irvine’s off-campus student population.

UC Irvine is a community of over 30,000 undergraduate students, 6,000 graduate students and thousands of university professors, administrators and staff. The University is a powerful engine for the local economy and student upward mobility, as many of UCI’s undergraduate students are first generation students or from low-income families. While most UCI students live within two miles of campus, a large contingent of students live farther away from campus in other Irvine neighborhoods and commute to and from their classes due to unaffordable rents near the main campus.

ASUCI is concerned about Proposals 2 and 4, as we believe these maps could divide UCI’s off-campus student population. The ASUCI Senate voted unanimously on Tuesday to officially oppose Proposals 2 and 4 unless the maps are amended to better keep Irvine’s college student population together. We believe these maps will jeopardize Irvine college students opportunity for political representation by dividing UCI’s off-campus student population and, in the case, of Proposal 2, separating UC Irvine from Irvine Valley College, a campus where many UCI students attend classes and whose students have similar issues in need of representation.

We hope that the board will make the following changes to Proposals 2 and 4 to make them more representative of Irvine college students as well as the city in general:

- Avoiding dividing the city of Irvine between districts, if possible. This would help ensure that UCI’s off-campus population is better represented and minimize potential for voter confusion.

- If Irvine must be divided, do not divide the city into more than two districts and avoid using Interstate 405 as the dividing line, which is a boundary that would separate UCI from IVC and many off-campus students from the main campus

- Minimize the amount of coastal Orange County South Irvine gets paired with. UC Irvine serves a number of low-income and first generation college students and we are concerned that pairing UC Irvine and the middle class neighborhoods of south Irvine could result in a district that does not represent those communities

We hope that the Board will listen to our concerns and we thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Zachary R. Griggy

Social Sciences Senator

Associated Students of UC Irvine

Please do not select a map that would divide Costa Mesa.

Thank you very much.

Wendy Leece

Costa Mesa resident

My name is Uyen Vo and I am a resident of Westminster, CA. I support the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance Supervisorial map. This map prioritizes communities that have been historically marginalized, corrects the problems with the current configuration, and complies with the legal requirements of the Voting Rights Act and Fair Maps Act. The current map configuration has disenfranchised communities of color by prioritizing the interests of one political party.

The OC PRA map has made communities of interest its top priority when drawing lines, considering the important testimonies of residents from communities that have been harmed by the current configuration.

The board needs to correct the significant legal problems with the current map configuration. I urge you to adopt the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance map.

My name is Cuong Vo and I am a resident of Westminster, CA. I support the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance Supervisorial map. This map prioritizes communities that have been historically marginalized, corrects the problems with the current configuration, and complies with the legal requirements of the Voting Rights Act and Fair Maps Act. The current map configuration has disenfranchised communities of color by prioritizing the interests of one political party.

The OC PRA map has made communities of interest its top priority when drawing lines, considering the important testimonies of residents from communities that have been harmed by the current configuration.

The board needs to correct the significant legal problems with the current map configuration. I urge you to adopt the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance map.

Hello,

My name is Phuong Vo and I am a resident of Long Beach, CA. I’m writing to support the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance map. As the current map configuration stands, communities of color are disenfranchised because of the prioritization of the interests of one political party. Whereas the OC PRA map prioritizes communities that have been historically marginalized, corrects the problems with the current map configuration, and complies with the legal requirements of the Voting Rights Act and Fair Maps Act. The OC PRA map has made communities of interest its top priority when drawing lines. Including consideration of the important testimonies of residents from communities that have been harmed by the current map. The Board needs to correct the significant legal problems with the current map configuration, so I urge you to adopt the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance map.

To whom it may concern:

I am a citizen and 35 year resident of Rossmoor. It is my strong belief that the unincorporated community of Rossmoor should in all matters and respects be governed by Orange County. Any consideration or proposal to place Rossmoor in a legislative district other than Orange County should be rejected immediately. Our neighboring cities of Los Alamitos and Seal Beach together comprise a tight knit, well-balanced community. All three are located in the County of Orange and share the Los Alamitos school district. Any redistricting with Long Beach or other communities in Los Angeles county makes no sense for any residents. Thank you!

It is my strong belief that the unincorporated community of Rossmoor should in all matters and respects be governed by Orange County. Any consideration or proposal to place Rossmoor in a legislative district other than Orange County should be rejected immediately. Our neighboring cities of Los Alamitos and Seal Beach together comprise a tight knit, well-balanced community. All three are located in the County of Orange and share the Los Alamitos school district. Any redistricting with Long Beach or other communities in Los Angeles county makes no sense for any residents.

My name is Nathan Hayden and I am a resident of Irvine. I support the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance Supervisorial map. This map prioritizes communities that have been historically marginalized, corrects the problems with the current configuration, and complies with the legal requirements of the Voting Rights Act and Fair Maps Act. The current map configuration has disenfranchised communities of color by prioritizing the interests of one political party.

The OC PRA map has made communities of interest its top priority when drawing lines, considering the important testimonies of residents from communities that have been harmed by the current configuration.

The board needs to correct the significant legal problems with the current map configuration. I urge you to adopt the OC People’s Redistricting Alliance map.

Thank you

Dear members of OC BOS:

I am writing this to request your support in voting for redistricting proposal map #2

1. This map proposal creates the strongest Asian Pacific Islander district of any proposal, unifying and focused on our common Asian needs.

2. Connects Orange County's growing north-western Asian Pacific Islander communities, especially in cities like Garden Grove, Fullerton, Westminster and Fountain Valley.

3. It is the strongest possible configuration to empower API voices as a whole.

4. It is legally sound and creates a Latino Voting Rights Act district as required by law

Communities of interest deserve local representation that advocates for their needs and values and promotes opportunities for them. I hope the immigrant communities of Orange County can look forward to a local government that serves and represents them well by adopting the proposal #2 map. The map #2 also keeps Los Alamitos Unified School District intact,, as it covers three cities- Seal Beach, Los Alamitos and Rossmoor.

Please vote in favor of proposal map #2. Thank you very much,

Dear members of Orange County Board of supervisors:

I am writing this to give full support to the proposal #2 redistricting.

Being an american of Asian descent I believe the proposal #2 redistricting map:

1. Creates the strongest API district of any proposal

2. Connects OC's growing north-western API communities

3. Strongest possible configuration to empower API voices

4. It is legally sound and creates a Latino VRA district as required by law

5. This will help the Asian community in the next 10 years as these lines will be set.

Thank you very much in advance for considering my support for the proposal #2 map.