STORYLINE Community

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

LGBT community weighs in on redistricting

by Melissa Corker, published on July 20, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Storyline: Community RSS Feed

1 of 3
close

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

1 of 3
Loading images
Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image

When is comes to redistricting, the LGBT community has a lot to say about being recognized as a legitimate community of interest and working toward getting the central city united into one council district.

“Unless you see yourself represented, it’s hard to see yourself in the world,” said Steve Hansen, a community activist and a member of the former Citizens Advisory Committee on Redistricting.

Hansen and Rosanna Herber, chairperson of the LGBT Redistricting Committee, said members of the LGBT community worked tirelessly over the last several months to be recognized as a community of interest and be given a stake in the process. Their goal has been to finally see the central city united.

“We are a very diverse city,” Hansen said, “and our strength comes from that diversity.”

The LGBT Redistricting Committee was made up of representatives of the Sacramento Gay & Lesbian Center, the Rainbow Chamber of Commerce, the Stonewall Democratic Club and other LGBT community leaders.

Herber said the group attended advisory committee meetings and testified before the committee at every opportunity.

“The common theme (of our testimony) was that a majority of our community live in the urban core and we don’t want to have it split any longer,” Herber said.

There are approximately 31,000 people in the grid which is shared by three council districts, Hansen said, and “(the people in the grid) have have a lot more in common with each other than the people in Natomas (who share a district) have with them.”

The standard of “one person, one vote” includes the notion of not diluting the electoral power of groups of people that have historically been subject to discrimination. By splitting the central city, Hansen said, that’s exactly what happens.

“The neighborhoods in the central city have been sliced and diced so much,” Hansen said. “The people there have no real electoral power.”

People in the grid share a common geography, a common cultural landscape – and common issues, Hansen said. People in other areas ignore those issues because they aren’t as affected by them.

Homelessness is one issue that Hansen said has been allowed to persist in the grid for so long because the majority of voters in each of the three districts that contain part of the core live outside that central area.

“Ultimately, none of the people who vote have any skin in the game,” Hansen said. “As long as the problem stays out of North Natomas, East Sacramento, Land Park or Curtis Park, people are perfectly fine with that.”

Hansen said that, although he feels the elected representatives do try, “ultimately their concerns are going to be concerns from where the majority of the (voters) are.”

“It’s political economy,” Hansen said.

From the LGBT point of view, it is important to have the ability to elect the candidate of their choice, Herber said.

Historically, there has never been an openly LGBT person elected to the City Council and Herber said, if there is ever going to be one, “we have to have our support united.”

“It’s one thing to have someone relay your concerns, but it’s better when they share your concerns,” Hansen said.

The advisory committee recommended four maps to City Council for redrawing district lines. Three of the maps unite the central city into one district.

“In the past, it doesn’t seem anyone was held responsible for redistricting, so we got lines that weren’t necessarily fair, they reflected the whims of the council,” Hansen said.

During the process, Hansen said his role on the advisory committee was as “a person who cares about the city,” and not as a representative of any community or organization.

“I was primarily concerned about the legitimacy of the process,” Hansen said. “I challenged the committee to remember that the public is watching us and they would hold us accountable.”

Hansen said that, after hearing all the public testimony, the advisory committee understood that there wasn’t a good justification for the central city to be broken up.

“We had to keep asking, ‘What’s best for the city? How do we do right by our communities?’ “ Hansen said.

Sara Freid, Interim Executive Director for the Sacramento Gay & Lesbian Center, said the response from the advisory committee to their testimony throughout the redistricting process was “positive and encouraging.”

“I feel like they listened to us,” she added. “It’s nice to be heard as a community.”

The LGBT Redistricting Committee will go to City Council Tuesday and participate in the public discussion on redistricting again, Herber said.

“We are going to ask the council to do what the advisory committee did,” Herber said. “Respect the LGBT community as a community of interest and see where our community lives, and keep the central core together.”

Hansen agreed.

“It’s the fair and just thing to do to make sure that the LGBT community – as a legitimate community of interest – is not just recognized by the process, but respected by it,” Hansen said.

The City Council has until about Aug. 26 to decide where the new district lines will be drawn.

Melissa Corker is a Staff Reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow her on Twitter @MelissaCorker.

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

July 21, 2011 | 7:54 AM
Gerrymandering sucks, period. How about just putting downtown, Midtown and East Sacto in one district because they are contiguous?
3 0
REPLY
July 21, 2011 | 9:34 AM
With no consideration of sexual preferences??? Barbaric!
2 1
REPLY
July 21, 2011 | 1:26 PM
Quoting Mr. Hansen from the article "It’s one thing to have someone relay your concerns, but it’s better when they share your concerns,” Hansen said.

There is line after line of these generalizations in this article, but the actual "concerns" never get articluated. I see a comment about the issue of homelessness in the central city, but how does the downtown homeless problem affect the LGBT more than any other central city resident?

Yes the central city should be a contiguous council district. But claiming a LGBT community of interest is hogwash, since the LGBT is unable to identify a single specific example of beling left out of any political process.

The LGBT community is exhibiting the worst kind of political and social bigotry just so they can claim "one of their own" as a councilmember.
3 2
REPLY
July 22, 2011 | 7:23 AM
I do not think East Sacramento and Midtown are any more continuous than Midtown and Land Park or Curtis Park are. Nope. The neighborhoods that share the same issues and concerns are Midtown, Downtown, Southside, and the North End (Alkali Flat/Mansion).
1 1
REPLY
edited on  July 25, 2011 | 10:36 AM
Southside? As in Meadowview? Florin? I think you may have a Definition Game going on here. As far as most of us are concerned Alkali Flat *is* downtown.

So put the whole "Grid area" and the Fabulous 30s-40's-50's in a district. So the gays can feel "Fabulous", heh.

More seriously, the Grid area alone does not have enough people to warrant a district.
0 1
REPLY
edited on  July 22, 2011 | 7:35 AM
@ cogmeyer: While I believe that neither sex or race nor party affiliation should play any part redistricting, for you to say that the homosexual population has not been left out of the political process just shows your willful ignorance on the matter. Also to claim that this is the 'worst' kind of social bigotry is really twisting reality completely inside out. Do you really want discuss social bigotry with gay man? I think they know a thing or two about that. You have just shown your true colors.
0 4
REPLY
July 22, 2011 | 7:23 AM
Mark
Instead of name-calling, why don't you educate us! Please name a single issue where the needs of the LGBT community have not been represented by the city council.

As I read the article above, the only named issue is the homeless problem, which I have a hard time seeing as a LGBT issue. So what are the LGBT issues?
3 0
REPLY
July 22, 2011 | 7:11 AM
The idea of a single council district for all the area between the rivers, Broadway, and Alhambra makes sense for a lot of reasons. Don't expect for too many politicians or civic 'leaders' to endorse this since it's not in their interest to do so - most of them live in the suburbs. We need a grass roots campaign to make it happen. If this group's efforts spark that movement I will be happy regardless of my disagreement with their premise.
0 0
REPLY
July 22, 2011 | 8:25 AM
Name calling? Did you not write that this is the worst kind of social bigotory? Don't play the conversative victim with me. I don't buy. There are several issues that I can think of where the city did not stand against hate and discrimination. Take the guy who for years had the truck plastered with vile anti-gay crap parked around downtown. Do you think that if he had anti-black or anti-Mexican billboards on his truck it would have lasted that long? You might not hear about the harassment but it still goes on all the time and the police response is more miss than hit. Additionally, I don't see anything wrong with gay people wanting to have a gay representative do you? Should only heterosexuals be represented? Of course, sexual orientation should not be the deciding factor in determining who is best qualified for any job, but for many heterosexuals it has been.

We both probably agree that this issue has nothing to do is being gay or straight, but it took a group with a particular focus to get people talking about forming a central city council district so I don't care. BTW if more gays live in the central city and there are more homeless in the central city then I can see how homelessness would be a lgbt issue, don't you?
1 3
REPLY
July 22, 2011 | 10:42 AM
Mark
A green thumbs up for you... now we are getting somewhere! After multiple articles in multiple news sources on this topic, you are the FIRST to ever publicly name a specific LGBT issue related to local governance. Next time local media needs a comment on justification for the

Guilty as charged of being conservative as hell on fiscal matters, but social or sexual arrangements of consenting adults is none of my business and it should not be the governments business either. Furthermore the gay community is an asset to Sacramento, and gay businesses have been an economic engine for midtown long before midtown was cool.

I totally share your concerns about Sac Police crime response, and totally agree that SacPD need to respond swiftly to harassment or intimidation. The anti-gay truck messages is a tougher nut for a city to address, since it also involves 1st amendment issues, but as a citizen of course I agree that nobody should have to see that.

I have no issue with a gay city councilmember (I assume we have already had one anyway). But considering that at most there are a couple thousand LGBT voters in the central city and each council district is 50k plus, it is a bit of a stretch to say that a LGBT councilmember would somehow be “representative” of the district.

So I agree on some points, disagree on others, but again kudos for actually laying some issues on the table so we can understand the motivation a little better.
2 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below. Use commas to separate your tags.

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background