Redistricting is threatening to tear aside San Francisco’s AAPI group
San Francisco is a city known for its cultural and racial diversity. But if the draft redistribution maps are approved for the state legislature under consideration, the city assembly seats could become far less representative of this diversity – and undo decades of political organizing, particularly within the Asian-American and Pacific island populations.
Every 10 years, following the US census, the legislative district boundaries are redrawn across the country to reflect changes in the population. New maps are designed to ensure fair representation by keeping the population roughly the same in each district. But maintaining a similar population size in the counties is not the only consideration. As the borders are redrawn, cartographers must also hold together people with common cultures, interests and languages, thus protecting their ability to have a say in public affairs. To prevent these minority groups from becoming segregated, some states, including California, have used “interest groups” as a redistributive factor.
Defined by the California Supreme Court as “contiguous people with shared social and economic interests,” the court orders that “the geographic integrity of everyone … possible.” The proposed changes to the boundaries of Congregation Districts 17 and 19 do not meet this criterion.
If approved, the proposed card will divide many interest groups. Asian-American and Pacific islanders living in Chinatown would be separated from the growing populations of these communities in the Visitacion Valley and Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhoods. The LGBTQ community living in Castro would be separated from the growing LGBTQ community in Bernal Heights. The Latinx church in the mission district would be split off from the Latinx church in the outer mission. The African American community at Fillmore would be separated from the African American community at Bayview-Hunter’s Point. The division of these minority communities would dilute their ability to have a say in who represents them.
The proposed relocation of Congregation 17 east of the city is of particular concern to the AAPI community, which has seen significant population growth over the past decade according to the 2020 US Census. Not only would it break up the AAPI community in the city, but it would also reduce the population in that district from 34% to 30%. Additionally, the proposed boundaries for Congregation District 17 would make it a white and more conservative district. By integrating the city’s most affluent and mostly white neighborhoods, including Seas Cliff, Pacific Heights, and St. Francis Wood, with some of the city’s most famous and historically minority enclaves, including Chinatown, Castro, Mission, and Fillmore, The Percentage of white voters in proposed Assembly District 17 would rise from 41% to 56%. This result would also not reflect the population development of the city.
The district boundaries have remained relatively constant for 30 years. During this time, the AAPI community has worked hard to organize and mobilize to ensure representation. As a result, San Francisco has had at least one member of the AAPI community represented in the congregation for the past 20 years. And until David Chius was recently appointed city attorney, no two members of the AAPI congregation had represented San Francisco at the same time. The proposed changes threaten to hamper those historic voting patterns that have helped increase AAPI’s participation in state government and stifle decades of political activism and community engagement. At a time when the nonprofit Stop AAPI Hate 1 in 5 Asian-American and Pacific Islanders has reported experiencing a hate incident in the United States in the past 12 months, AAPI’s representation in the congregation is greater than that each required.
The AAPI community and San Francisco have benefited greatly from the leadership of Congregation Member Phil Ting and former Congregation member David Chiu. They raised a historic $ 165.5 million to help tackle incidents of hatred against Asian Americans. They also secured $ 26.5 million in government funding to help build a new Edge on the Square arts and media center in Chinatown. In addition, during their tenure, they received government funding for local nonprofits, affordable housing, and immigration services that benefited the AAPI community and low income and immigrants across the city.
Opponents of the redistribution proposal have presented an alternative map that clearly maintains the current district boundaries with only minimal adjustments. A proposal from our San Francisco-based nonprofit organization Chinese American Voters Education Committee promises to protect local interest groups and recognize the unique qualities of San Francisco’s neighborhoods.
The non-partisan body responsible for drawing up the proposed redistribution maps, the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, is committed to creating boundaries that are free from special interests, politics, and political influence. But the commission has not heard enough from the residents of San Francisco. The proposed redistribution maps illustrate this. The commission must work to hear from local residents and ensure that the redistribution of our boroughs preserves the “interest groups” in San Francisco. The current district boundaries have successfully served the AAPI population, the African American population, the Latinx population, and the LGBTQ population. Our city and its home communities deserve a city map that is fair and equitable and that respects the current district boundaries as closely as possible.
David Lee is the executive director and Joshua Jue is an intern with the Chinese American Voters Education Committee.
