Council Approves Alternate Redistricting Plan to Keep Scotts Valley Whole

With the county considering approving a proposal that would split Scotts Valley into two supervisorial districts, City Council members met on Wednesday night to discuss a game plan that would keep the city whole.

The council voted unanimously to approve a resolution that proposes a revised redistricting plan for the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors to consider. The new plan offers two options for Scotts Valley redistricting—one that is drawn along current city lines, and another that expands just a bit to include some areas that are just outside the city limits.

The council began looking at alternative options after the board of supervisors unveiled its proposed plan for redistricting on Aug. 23. Under the California Election Code and the U.S. Voting Rights Act, the board must look at adjusting supervisorial districts every 10 years to ensure that each district is nearly equal in population. The county has a population of 262,382, which, when divided among the five districts, would be approximately 52,476 represented by each supervisor.

A task force comprised of a representative from each district worked on a plan for more than four months. The task force submitted two county-wide plans to be considered; however, each plan divides the city of Scotts Valley along Highway 17 into two separate supervisorial districts, moving the Granite Creek and Green Hills neighborhoods into District One and leaving the rest of Scotts Valley in District Five. Right now, all of Scotts Valley, along with San Lorenzo Valley, is in District Five and represented by Supervisor Mark Stone.

“Why does somebody choose to split a city when they don’t have to, or split a community of interest when they don’t have to?” Councilman Jim Reed asked.

There are several factors the county must consider when looking at redistricting: topography; geography; cohesiveness, contiguity, integrity and compactness of territory; and community of interests.

“The proposal the county has put forward fails in virtually every objective that it set out to meet,” Reed said.

Councilman Randy Johnson agreed.

“Almost all the rules have been broken for no apparent reason,” he said. “If you have a rationale that has to make sense and you really have no other way to form these lines, then I suppose that kind of decision can be justified and explained. But in this particular situation, there is no justification.”

Mayor Dene Bustichi added that while it may sound good in theory to have two supervisors for the city, it is really not the best option.

“I think the reality is that [instead of having two], you will have none,” Bustichi said. “Our voice will be diluted into two districts to such a point that neither supervisor will really need to listen to the concerns or the voice of Scotts Valley. We won’t have a strong enough voice. We will be a weak voice in the back of two supervisors.”

Though the city passed the resolution with the alternate redistricting plans, there is no guarantee the county will consider them. Scotts Valley City Attorney Kirsten Powell said there may be a procedure for reconsideration should the board approve the plan that would split the city. The other option, Powell said, would be for the city to challenge the decision by writ of mandate, which would be a lawsuit.

The board of supervisors will discuss the redistricting proposal at its Tuesday meeting.